Health Bill Passes Key Test in the Senate With 60 Votes

Archive. Enter at your own risk. Unmoderated thread.


Moderator: Super Moderators

Linnea
Moderator
Posts: 14985
Joined: 04-22-2000 02:00 AM

Post by Linnea » 12-21-2009 04:43 PM

Also, racehorse - please explain the 'overwhelming majority' the Democrats have in the Senate. How does that work? This is disingenuous. Are you suggesting it is reasonable for each 'Democrat' and Independent to move in lockstep with all others in their party? This was a craven political strategy which consumed all of McConnell's efforts, and he held his '40'.

My point is, it is disgraceful the Republicans, led by Senator McConnell, did not rise to the occasion and sincerely accept the challenge to lend their support, which could have been considerable, in acheiving the best health care reform for the American people - whom they were elected to serve.

Are you suggesting the Republicans were incapable of such service to the people of this country?

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

Post by racehorse » 12-21-2009 05:07 PM

Republican Senators led by Charles Grassley and Olympia Snowe worked diligently to reach coompromise with the Democratic majority. In the end, Democrats rejected all of their recommendations.

To charge Republicans with "obstructionism" now seems disingenuous to me considering when President Bush announced Social Security Reform was the primary legislative item on his agenda for his second term, Democrat leaders immediately announced it "dead on arrival" and refused to work in any way with Republicans on it at all. That was true obstructionism.

Also, the way the stimulus bill was pushed through without Democrats working in good faith to allow Republicans efforts in drafting the legislation ( yes, many Republicans feel it was totally unnessary) is further indication of Democratic not GOP insincerity on working in a truly bi-partisan way. After all some Democrats openly stated the GOP would "sabotage" any such legislation so should not be involved with crafting it.

There has never been significant legislation of the magnitude of the Health Care Reform bill enacted in the History of the country without any support from the opposition party. Some Democrats had to be all but "bribed" to support it. Republicans stood firm against this. There was clearly a failure of leadership on the part of Democrats not Republicans involving this legislation. When John McCain, Howard Dean, Orrin Hatch, and Ralph Nader all agree legislation should be defeated, it would appear to be seriously flawed.
racehorse
Image

User avatar
Psychicwolf
Pirate
Posts: 5999
Joined: 12-31-2006 12:47 AM

Post by Psychicwolf » 12-21-2009 05:58 PM

racehorse wrote:

There has never been significant legislation of the magnitude of the Health Care Reform bill enacted in the History of the country without any support from the opposition party. Some Democrats had to be all but "bribed" to support it. Republicans stood firm against this. There was clearly a failure of leadership on the part of Democrats not Republicans involving this legislation. When John McCain, Howard Dean, Orrin Hatch, and Ralph Nader all agree legislation should be defeated, it would appear to be seriously flawed.


Race speaks the truth here.

This bad bill rests squarely with the Dems, who have gutted it, sold the farm and bought off other Senators with pork and appeasement. I will move heaven and earth to see Harry Reid defeated.

The President has shown no leadership on this issue, which was supposed to be one of his "key" issues. Most Americans have no idea what is in the bill. He should have gotten on a plane, train or bus and traveled this country to sell the House version of the Bill. 2010 is coming up, enough pressure on those Senators who have to stand would have gone a long way. He considers this a victory??? Pul-leez, Mr. President.
Dance to heal the earth. Not just when you're dancing, but always. Live the dance, whenever you move, in all you do, dance to heal the earth.

Linnea
Moderator
Posts: 14985
Joined: 04-22-2000 02:00 AM

Post by Linnea » 12-21-2009 09:39 PM

The view is really much clearer if one is neither a rabid partisan, nor feeling jilted by Obama.

rumike
Pirate
Posts: 2462
Joined: 04-27-2008 11:10 PM

Post by rumike » 12-21-2009 10:57 PM

If memory serves, Bush & the GOP's plan to "fix" social security was to privatize it. In other words, just another attempt to destroy a good social program by turning over more of our lives to corporations, whom I didn't vote for. In other words, make it look like health insurance. Dems stopped it and good for them...and all of us who want to retire with piece of mind.

With Governor Dean and Paul Krugman both saying this is a flawed bill but a huge step forward, well, then I am starting to feel better about it. The country will be better off with this bill.
Anchors Aweigh!

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

Post by racehorse » 12-22-2009 12:25 AM

rumike wrote: Dems stopped it and good for them...


It was partial privatization and only for a small portion of the funds at that. Yes, you are quite correct Democrats stopped it. The counter argument is Social Security recipients would potentially have benefited greatly and had more personal control and choice over their funds and financial futures.

Not to argue the specifics or desirability of that proposal because it serves no point, at least for now, but Democrats apparently feel it is acceptable for them and indeed just to totally refuse cooperation and declare "dead on arrival" GOP Presidential top priorities. However Republicans are "obstructionists" to have any reservations at all about the top priorities of a Democratic President or the Democratic drafted legislation to implement it. After all, Democratic priorities are noble while GOP priorities are contemptible.

:rolleyes:
racehorse
Image

User avatar
Psychicwolf
Pirate
Posts: 5999
Joined: 12-31-2006 12:47 AM

Post by Psychicwolf » 12-22-2009 10:32 AM

Here is the version of the bill they are voting on.
http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/pati ... re-act.pdf

Edited to add: "The Managers Amendment"
http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/mana ... ndment.pdf
Last edited by Psychicwolf on 12-22-2009 10:34 AM, edited 1 time in total.
Dance to heal the earth. Not just when you're dancing, but always. Live the dance, whenever you move, in all you do, dance to heal the earth.

User avatar
Psychicwolf
Pirate
Posts: 5999
Joined: 12-31-2006 12:47 AM

Post by Psychicwolf » 12-22-2009 10:38 AM

And a probable constitutional challenge in the making. Race, attorney's are going to have a field day with this thing. Mandates to purchase something from a for-profit business...caps on profits...the list is endless.:rolleyes:

http://www.medicalprogresstoday.com/spo ... tlight.php
Dance to heal the earth. Not just when you're dancing, but always. Live the dance, whenever you move, in all you do, dance to heal the earth.

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

Post by Cherry Kelly » 12-22-2009 10:57 AM

The original claim was that it would be health care for ALL US citizens - but it seems bribery rules and some states VIA their DEM reps are MORE equal - ie better cause they will get MORE care than other states. Bribery - pure and simple.

So where are these millions of $$ coming from for these bribery payouts?

Oh ya - and heard on news this morning - haven't had time to go to the voted on bill to check out the references yet - but $$ to pay ACORN is back in - and the "death panels" are in - ones set up to control what is and is not accepted for coverage for medical care.

There was this bribery graft directly to a former legislator - who is now in jail...so why aren't these blatant bribery people - giving and accepting for votes - not under arrest?

And this other bit - passing this bill that supposedly doesn't even start until 2014 -- is certainly NO emergency, so what is the rush to get it passed? OH ya taxes would take affect NOW of course.

Linnea
Moderator
Posts: 14985
Joined: 04-22-2000 02:00 AM

Post by Linnea » 12-22-2009 02:14 PM

Rush Limbaugh and the Supremes, with Sarah Palin on vocals and the Tea Party chorus...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5IIXeR5OUI

User avatar
Rombaldi
Call Me "Hussein"
Posts: 9916
Joined: 09-05-2003 01:03 AM

Post by Rombaldi » 12-22-2009 02:34 PM

Psychicwolf wrote: Mandates to purchase something from a for-profit business...caps on profits...the list is endless
Actually if you read it carefully, there is REQUIRED to be a non-profit entity created along side the money grubbers
Republican - re·pub·li·can (r-pbl-kn) - political party, which will control part of Congress 2011-2012, undermining the strength of the country - on purpose, in public, without apology or shame - simply for a campaign advantage in 2012.

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

Post by HB3 » 12-22-2009 02:50 PM

And now a word from Jim DeMint, devil incarnate....

Reid Bill Says Future Congresses Cannot Repeal Parts of Reid Bill

Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) pointed out some rather astounding language in the Senate health care bill during floor remarks tonight. First, he noted that there are a number of changes to Senate rules in the bill--and it's supposed to take a 2/3 vote to change the rules. And then he pointed out that the Reid bill declares on page 1020 that the Independent Medicare Advisory Board cannot be repealed by future Congresses:

There's one provision that I found particularly troubling and it's under Section C, titled "Limitations on Changes to this subsection."

And I quote--"It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection."

This is not legislation. It's not law. This is a rule change. It's a pretty big deal. we will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a Senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law.

I'm not even sure that it's constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a Senate rule. I don't see why the majority party wouldn't put this in every bill. if you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future Senates.

I mean, we want to bind future Congresses. this goes to the fundamental purpose of Senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future co congresses.

Watch DeMint's full remarks here:
[see video of remarks on Senate floor]

According to page 1001 of the Reid bill, the purpose of the Independent Medical Advisory Board is to "reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending." For any fearmongers out there tempted to call an unelected body that recommends Medicare cuts a "Death Panel," let me be clear. According to page 1004, IMAB proposals "shall not include any recommendation to ration health care"--you know, just like the bill says there's no funding for abortion.

Paging Sarah Palin: the death panel is unkillable.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/T ... cong_1.asp

User avatar
Psychicwolf
Pirate
Posts: 5999
Joined: 12-31-2006 12:47 AM

Post by Psychicwolf » 12-22-2009 04:11 PM

It's not a death panel, HB, but it is a
"best practices" advisory panel. Like the group who recommended women between 40-50 don't NEED mammograms.:rolleyes: This gives the insurance companies and Medicare an out for not paying for anything outside those best practices, unless your doctor documents there is medical necessity (prior history, family history in some cases, etc) to go outside those guidelines and then an insurance case manager has to give the authorization. Physicians, for the most part (including a few I know) are not happy with how large a roll this provision is being given.
Dance to heal the earth. Not just when you're dancing, but always. Live the dance, whenever you move, in all you do, dance to heal the earth.

Post Reply

Return to “Politics and Government 2004-2009”