Updates on Health Care Reform - Jan 14, 2010- continuing

Moderator: Super Moderators

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 03-18-2010 12:39 AM

Linnea wrote: Well, not really, Cherry. This stuff is very complicated. That's why we pay them the big bucks. Heh. ;)

Here is an article on Wiki on Reconciliation Bills:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconcilia ... ongress%29


Linnea,

I had a feeling there was something wrong with this argument. Possibly because it seemed, self-evidently, like an argument made to rationalize a skeevy move once the more proper legislative channels had been blocked. Here's some additional information on the way reconciliation has been used in practice:
Are the GOP Hypocrites on the Slaughter Rule?

Over at the AEI blog, Norman Ornstein calls out Republicans for their hypocrisy on the Slaughter Rule:

Any veteran observer of Congress is used to the rampant hypocrisy over the use of parliamentary procedures that shifts totally from one side to the other as a majority moves to minority status, and vice versa. But I can’t recall a level of feigned indignation nearly as great as what we are seeing now from congressional Republicans and their acolytes at the Wall Street Journal, and on blogs, talk radio, and cable news. It reached a ridiculous level of misinformation and disinformation over the use of reconciliation, and now threatens to top that level over the projected use of a self-executing rule by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In the last Congress that Republicans controlled, from 2005 to 2006, Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier used the self-executing rule more than 35 times, and was no stranger to the concept of “deem and pass.”

First of all, Ornstein is a bit off on the process. The “self-executing rule” has indeed been used extensively by both parties, but in most cases it is used to insert amendments into a bill without floor debate or a separate up-or-down vote. (This is just one of the many ways the House Rules Committee stacks the deck against dissent and makes the House—not the Senate—the undemocratic body. But that’s another story.)

By contrast, the Democrats want to use a self-executing rule to pass legislation without debate, amendment, or an yea-or-nay vote. This is far rarer. Mostly, it’s done via the “Gephardt Rule,” which automatically passes a measure raising the federal debt ceiling by the amount required in a given year’s budget (thus avoiding a separate, embarrassing vote for members). When bills are “deemed” passed outside the Gephardt Rule, it is usually for the purpose of rubber stamping minor tweaks to conference reports, or for disposing of internal and/or technical matters that affect only the House. In fact, according to the Rules Committee Republicans, only four times in the last 20 years has a “deeming” rule been used to send legislation directly to the president’s desk — including one bill to raise the debt limit, and one to rubber-stamp “Byrd Rule” modifications to a reconciliation bill.


http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/? ... czYzdiZTc=

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 03-18-2010 10:23 AM

But perhaps the Everly Brothers could put it better....

Deem,
Deem, deem, deem.
Deem,
Deem, deem, deem.

I want a bill in the worst way.
I’ve tried the beg-and-coerce way.
Whatever I want now, all I have to do

Is deem,
Deem, deem, deem.

It’s not too tough to find solutions
When you ignore the Constitution.
Whatever I want now, all I have to do

Is deem,
Deem, deem, deem

If I called a vote, chances are remote
That I’d win, night or day.
So the answer is, gee whiz,
I’ll just deem my troubles away.

I’m out of votes that I can buy
I want to win, and that is why
Whatever I want now, all I have to do

Is deem,
Deem, deem, deem,
Deem,
Deem, deem, deem …

(It fades out from there, kind of like your freedom.)

http://www.cleveland.com/obrien/index.s ... erlud.html

Cherry Kelly
Pirate
Posts: 12852
Joined: 07-29-2000 02:00 AM
Contact:

Post by Cherry Kelly » 03-18-2010 10:45 AM

States lining up to sue if this passes: From news today... posted without comment

[AP]: Idaho first to sign law to sue fed gov't over healthcare; 37 other states
consider...

[WashPost]: Virginia will sue...

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... eT5GKEQD9\
EGLNDO0

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virgin ... ffice_con\
firms_vi.html

===

Biker
Pirate
Posts: 1786
Joined: 11-04-2006 08:39 AM

Post by Biker » 03-18-2010 11:18 AM

Makes me proud to live in Idaho.

Biker
"Bring me my broadsword and clear understanding".

Ian Anderson

SETIsLady
Pirate
Posts: 19872
Joined: 04-14-2003 08:52 PM

Post by SETIsLady » 03-18-2010 12:03 PM

Originally posted by Cherry Kelly
States lining up to sue if this passes: From news today... posted without comment
Hi Ck, yes I was reading about that this morning as well. I wonder how that will effect other times this procedure was used. If they win, will it set a precedent and overturn the previous times ? Going to interesting to see how it plays out....

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 03-18-2010 12:25 PM

Daniel Foster completes his thought by noting that if the GOP sticks to its guns denouncing the "Slaughter Solution," they will undercut themselves once they regain power, and so their current behavior could be seen as oddly idealistic. Of course, he also realizes that in itself is probably idealistic on his part, and that the GOP will have no problem with contradicting themselves in the future, just like the Democrats have:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_1Zr4B_ ... r_embedded
Last edited by HB3 on 03-18-2010 12:29 PM, edited 1 time in total.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 03-18-2010 12:33 PM

Fred Barnes notes:
America will be in a constant health-care war if ObamaCare is enacted. Passage wouldn't end the health-care debate. Rather, it would perpetuate ObamaCare as the dominant issue for decades to come, reshape politics, create an annual funding crisis in Congress, and generate a spate of angry lawsuits. Yet few in Washington seem aware of what lies ahead....

Enacting ObamaCare would be only the beginning. The controversy surrounding its passage and how it might work would preoccupy the president, Congress and millions of average Americans for the foreseeable future--and then some.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 68462.html

Well, you know...omelets...eggs...who said that, anyway?

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 03-18-2010 12:53 PM

SETIsLady wrote: If they win, will it set a precedent and overturn the previous times ? Going to interesting to see how it plays out....


They will not win. All these cases will be dismissed when challenged. Federal law is ALWAYS supreme over state and local laws when there is a conflict.
racehorse
Image

Cherry Kelly
Pirate
Posts: 12852
Joined: 07-29-2000 02:00 AM
Contact:

Post by Cherry Kelly » 03-18-2010 12:57 PM

Seti -- I heard both KS and MO people talking about it as well.

then today Pelosi claiming the "estimated" stuff coming out is so positive. BUT when one actually reads the Adobe file - estimates based on taking the $$ from Medicare which haven't been approved yet - the opposite of what she is claiming is more of a reality. The whole thing is a mess.

Am just waiting to see the "72 hour" posting before voting thing to show up and if it matches the Senate Bill - word for word or not.

---
I'm still for throwing it out and working on just what DOES need fixed in health care.

--
ALSO today's news - something like 1/3 of drs/medical people - will quit?? Still trying to find the exact article on that as I only heard a clip off local radio host.

-

SETIsLady
Pirate
Posts: 19872
Joined: 04-14-2003 08:52 PM

Post by SETIsLady » 03-18-2010 01:21 PM

racehorse wrote: They will not win. All these cases will be dismissed when challenged. Federal law is ALWAYS supreme over state and local laws when there is a conflict.
Thanks Race, thats what I thought but wasn't sure.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 03-18-2010 01:35 PM

Yeah, that's when that whole, you know, "Civil War" thing kicks in....

Cherry Kelly
Pirate
Posts: 12852
Joined: 07-29-2000 02:00 AM
Contact:

Post by Cherry Kelly » 03-18-2010 01:46 PM


SETIsLady
Pirate
Posts: 19872
Joined: 04-14-2003 08:52 PM

Post by SETIsLady » 03-18-2010 01:49 PM

Thanks CK, will check it out. Ironic, its posted on Louise Slaughters website :eek:

cherry
Pirate
Posts: 5704
Joined: 05-28-2004 05:15 PM

Post by cherry » 03-18-2010 02:04 PM

Listen or watch Democracy Now with Amy Goodman tonight with Ralph Nader and Dennis Kucinich on the healthcare debate. Very interesting perspectives.


http://www.democracynow.org



Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader: A Discussion on Healthcare, Politics and Reform


Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio announced on Wednesday he would switch his vote on the Democrat-led healthcare reform bill and support the legislation even though it does not create a public option. Kucinich’s decision came two days after he spoke with President Obama aboard Air Force One on their way to a rally in his district. In a Democracy Now! exclusive, we spend the hour with Kucinich and former presidential candidate Ralph Nader for an in-depth discussion on healthcare, the Obama administration, the Iraq war and more. [includes rush transcript]

User avatar
IronsGold
Pirate
Posts: 855
Joined: 03-22-2004 01:29 AM

Post by IronsGold » 03-18-2010 08:17 PM

What about this...?

Obamacare Grants IRS Perilous Power, GOP Says
Thursday, 18 Mar 2010 05:46 PM
By: David A. Patten

The Internal Revenue Service would gain sweeping new powers under President Obama's healthcare reform proposals, in what Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee are calling a "dangerous expansion" of IRS powers.

That's according to a nine-page Republican report from the Committee on Ways and Means on Thursday. It's titled "The Wrong Prescription" Democrats' Health Overhaul Dangerously Expands IRS Authority."

Among the new powers the IRS would assume, the report says: The authority to confiscate tax refunds, to impose fines of over $2,200 per taxpayer, and to verify whether taxpayers' health insurance coverage is "acceptable."

Snip

IRS agents would be tasked with determining whether Americans had obtained the insurance coverage required under the individual mandate.
Individuals could be fined $2,250 or 2 percent of income, whichever is greater, if you are unable to prove you have "minimum essential coverage."
The IRS would be empowered to confiscate tax refunds if necessary.
Audits probably would increase as a result of the legislation's new requirements.
The budget for IRS operations will balloon by $10 billion in the next decade in order to administrate the new program.
Nearly half of the new individual mandate taxes will be paid "by Americans earning less than 300 percent of poverty, $66150 for a family of four.


http://newsmax.com/InsideCover/Obamacar ... /id/353209

I had my doubts, but Googled this and found a ton of info.

This sucks!
Last edited by IronsGold on 03-18-2010 08:21 PM, edited 1 time in total.
"What fresh hell is this?"
Dorothy Parker

Post Reply

Return to “Politics and Government 2010-2013”