9/11 responders bill defeated by GOP filibuster

guyver01

Lifer
Sep 25, 2000
22,135
5
61
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/12/09/senate.9.11.responders/index.html?hpt=T1

Washington (CNN) -- Senate Democrats failed Thursday to win a procedural vote to open debate on a bill that would provide medical benefits and compensation for emergency workers who were first on the scene of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The motion for cloture, or to begin debate, needed 60 votes to pass due to a Republican filibuster, but fell short at 57-42 in favor.

While supporters said they would try to bring the bill up again, either on its own or as part of other legislation to be considered, the vote Thursday jeopardized the measure's chances for approval in the final weeks of the current congressional session.

So... the republican's are anti-medical benefits for First Responders?

Lets see the republicant supporters explain this one.
 

guyver01

Lifer
Sep 25, 2000
22,135
5
61
what else's on the bill?

Republicans complained that the $7.4 billion price tag was too high, while Democrats said the government had an obligation to help the first responders to the deadliest terrorism attack in U.S. history.

The James Zadroga 9/11 Health Bill -- named after a deceased New York Police Department detective who had worked in the toxic plume at ground zero -- seeks to provide free medical coverage for responders and survivors who were exposed to toxins after the attacks.


http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h847/show
Nothing.
 

KlokWyze

Diamond Member
Sep 7, 2006
4,451
9
81
www.dogsonacid.com
I find it very odd that Republicans openly/strongly support ideologies and bills that are really against their voting base's stated values. I don't like the Dems either.......... but it's just bizarre.
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,559
8
0
This is very sad. People have no idea the conditions those people went trough. I was down there that day and again to drop off supplies we raised at every opportunity. My wife and I donated 500 pairs of shoes since the debris was tearing up their feet.

Hope opponents cudgel them to death with this position..
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Wow, after using 9/11 to start 2 wars that cost this country hundreds of billions, $7.4B is too high of a price for Republicans to pay to the 9/11 rescuers.
Bush&
 

guyver01

Lifer
Sep 25, 2000
22,135
5
61
I too would love to know what else is attached to that bill.

It's not about what is attached to the bill, but what is NOT attached to the bill.

Republicans said they would vote no for every bill until they get a tax break for the rich ...

no tax break for the rich?

no healthcare for the dying 9/11 responders.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,786
8,364
136
"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

When Bush said that, I thought of all the people who died because of 9/11 and all of the relatives and loved ones who mourned their deaths and how they must have felt outrageously betrayed when they heard those words come out of his mouth.

Seems like that attitude hasn't changed among the repubs in Congress since those infamous words were spoken.

If it's true that the repubs are doing this in single-minded fashion just to insure the rich keep all that they gained during the Bush years, then it's just utterly appalling the lengths they would go to to make that happen.

I really hope this is not the case.

But then again, the repubs held the unemployed hostage to make the rich happy, so holding the first responders hostage must be no big deal either.

This all seems reminiscent of the way Bush, Cheney and Rumsfled went after the veteran's benefits to help fund their war in Iraq.
 
Last edited:

rockyct

Diamond Member
Jun 23, 2001
6,656
32
91
The Republicans are going to get bit in the ass for these unpopular votes they are doing right now. Keeping the tax cuts for the upper class is hazy enough but using that to block stuff like this is getting too far to be able to bullshit your way out of it. If Democrats voted against a bill like this they'd be labeled as elitists who hate real American heroes and are just as bad as the terrorists who brought the buildings down.
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
22,347
4,973
136
The first responders should already have medical coverage from their employer ( City State County etc... ) Why would the Federal Government have to also provide medical coverage?

Is the Federal government also going to provide medical coverage for every emergency responder nation wide? Or is this only for New York?
 

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
The first responders should already have medical coverage from their employer ( City State County etc... ) Why would the Federal Government have to also provide medical coverage?

Is the Federal government also going to provide medical coverage for every emergency responder nation wide? Or is this only for New York?

They are probably running over their caps.

This bill was special funding to provide care to the people on the scene that day that were exposed to hazardous materials.
 

guyver01

Lifer
Sep 25, 2000
22,135
5
61
The first responders should already have medical coverage from their employer ( City State County etc... ) Why would the Federal Government have to also provide medical coverage?

Is the Federal government also going to provide medical coverage for every emergency responder nation wide? Or is this only for New York?

The bill provides guaranteed healthcare, which is important because in many union plans, coverage lapses when the member stops working

In addition, not all 9/11 responders are union members (though many are), and the bill also covers survivors of the attacks who lived or worked in the surrounding area.

The bill would formally authorize healthcare and monitoring programs that have been appropriated for the past several years.

The bill, which would cover 50,000 responders and survivors, creates a mandatory spending program until it sunsets 10 years from now.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acanthus
Where are all of the flag waving nationalistic republicans in this thread?


trying to think of an argument that somehow justifies it

Newly elected Republicans in Indiana also enacted a Death panel and killed a 6 month old baby. They denied a surgery because it would cost $500,000.

Also Wisconsin and Ohio elected Republican Governors that rejected rail plans and now the people of those two states are crying.

Just keep voting Republican dumb people and just keep on crying.

Edit: Good news, thanks to people like me pointing out the newly elected Republican Death Panel of Indiana they have had a change of heart and decided to give the baby a chance at life:

Links for the Internet deficient on AT

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2010/12/10/indiana-medicaid-denies-life-saving-transplant-to-baby/

Indiana Medicaid Denies Life-Saving Transplant To Baby


http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/12/09/indiana.transplant.needed/index.html?section=cnn_latest

Indiana infant to get transplant after all


An Indiana infant who was denied a life-saving transplant surgery by Medicaid will now have his operation paid for.

This decision comes after media reports of Seth's plight.
 
Last edited:

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acanthus
Where are all of the flag waving nationalistic republicans in this thread?




Newly elected Republicans in Indiana also enacted a Death panel and killed a 6 month old baby. They denied a surgery because it would cost $500,000.

Also Wisconsin and Ohio elected Republican Governors that rejected rail plans and now the people of those two states are crying.

Just keep voting Republican dumb people and just keep on crying.

Uh, the Ohio rail system was a retarded idea.
 

Generator

Senior member
Mar 4, 2005
793
0
0
Eat shit serfs - Sincerely Repubs...

7 billion is pretty ridiculous though. So many issues here, pay the most get the least. Despicable.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,994
779
126
Were the first responders rich? No? Then the GOP doesn't give a flying fuck about them.
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
20,569
3,762
126
I am thinking this is a sneaky move by the Democrats. The Republicans say they won't vote for anything until the tax cuts are extended so the Democrats put forth this bill

Just out of curiosity where is the outrage that it took 9 years for this to be sent before Congress. Did a party wait until it was politically advantagious to put forward this bill? (Personally I believe the Democrats are now just using this as a political tool)

That said I am all for this bill - but it clearly should have been before Congress before now and that is both the Republicans AND Democrats fault
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
22,237
6,432
136
All first responders already have generous medical benefits and wokmens comp. Why does congress need to add to that?
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,936
55,293
136
I am thinking this is a sneaky move by the Democrats. The Republicans say they won't vote for anything until the tax cuts are extended so the Democrats put forth this bill

Just out of curiosity where is the outrage that it took 9 years for this to be sent before Congress. Did a party wait until it was politically advantagious to put forward this bill? (Personally I believe the Democrats are now just using this as a political tool)

That said I am all for this bill - but it clearly should have been before Congress before now and that is both the Republicans AND Democrats fault

This issue has been before Congress before, and blocked by the Republicans before back in July.