Dems intend to bypass GOP on health compromise

[Thump553]

Excellent move, if true. The GOP's contribution has been limited to "hell no" on anything, pulling any and every stunt possible (including demanding that every word of the proposed bill be read aloud on the Senate floor-as if they can't read themselves (and then not even sitting through the reading) and shamelessly playing politics throughout the process.

Maybe among the teabaggers and "keep your government hands off my Medicare" crowd the GOP tactics score points, but I think the vast majority of the country sees the contrast between the partisan extremists the GOP has become and rational leadership.

 

[Darwin333]

Are you really that stupid? See if you can come up with some reasons why the Democratic bill is so bad that relate to what Republicans have done? Try real hard, hehe. Jesus Christ, blessed are the brain dead.

Yeah! Lets show those bastard Republicans! They are responsible for this piece of crap bill so we are going to pass it and make it piece of crap law!!!

Makes perfect sense.

 

[spidey07]

Excellent move, if true. The GOP's contribution has been limited to "hell no" on anything, pulling any and every stunt possible (including demanding that every word of the proposed bill be read aloud on the Senate floor-as if they can't read themselves (and then not even sitting through the reading) and shamelessly playing politics throughout the process.

Maybe among the teabaggers and "keep your government hands off my Medicare" crowd the GOP tactics score points, but I think the vast majority of the country sees the contrast between the partisan extremists the GOP has become and rational leadership.

When you're doing something the majority of the country doesn't want the results in your job approval are only going to get worse and we're going to vote them all out. It started with TARP and ever since congress has been going against the will of the people. The people will not stand for it much longer.

 

[Moonbeam]

Shhhhhhh, you'll burst Moonbeam's bubble. His self-hate and loathing is the cause of his delusions.

I asked you to come up with some reasons the Republicans are responsible for the shape of the health care legislation and you seem to be unable to do so. You fail at simple thinking. Sad. By the way, the fact that the Democrats have control this minute is totally irrelevant. Can you figure that out also? Probably not. It takes some thinking.

 

[werepossum]

That link in my post, that last line in the first post. Some of you picked up on it and many of you didn't. It shook down just about how I figured it would.

This bill is about Fundamentally Transforming the United States of America. Oh, it looks like a health care bill to some. It will definitely make some changes in that regard. But this bill is the start of something very big. Our country is being transformed. We were told the transformation was coming and the crowds cheered. This bill will give the government control over one sixth of our economy. This, in addition to control over banks and businesses.

I would like anyone with even a semblance of an open mind to read this article. It's filled with history.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/whats_wrong_with_socialism.html

What did our leader mean by fundamental transformation? What are the intentions, what are the goals? When the majority of the Senate votes against the majority of the people, what form of government is that?

It's not too late, but time is very short.

I loved the article - I automatically love almost anything quoting Hayek, whose nightmare is coming true - but we should point out that it's not a question of whether or not to have socialism, but rather how much socialism we should have. Few of us would want to live in a purely capitalist society, just as (hopefully) few of us would want to live in a purely socialist society.

I too have the feeling that something really big is about to happen. Obama was very clear in his speeches to adoring fans how he intended to fundamentally transform America; he was almost as clear in his general campaign speeches, he just didn't give any details. (Therefore allowing each person to project his or her own favored change and reform.) And the way things stand today, the Democrats are posed to almost certainly lose the House and quite possibly the Senate, either of which would render Obama's agenda DOA. (Ah, blessed gridlock, hallowed be thy name.) There is always the possibility though that the Democrats believe that if they can get these reforms in place, together with the new agencies and powers, that they can so stress the health care system that its collapse in inevitable. The Democrats will then point to the collapse and say that would not have happened had the Republicans cooperated in "real reform", thereby restoring the Dems to power and ushering in single payer with an actual public mandate.

And I'm still not certain that all this isn't just another page from Saul Alinkski's handbook - spend as much as possible, get as many people on the dole as possible, and make the system catastrophically collapse, and the people will demand communism or at least full-blown socialism.

LMAO Darwin!

 

[Moonbeam]

Yeah! Lets show those bastard Republicans! They are responsible for this piece of crap bill so we are going to pass it and make it piece of crap law!!!

Makes perfect sense.

It makes absolute sense. It is exactly what will happen and what happens is all that can happen. Because something will happen, it makes sense that it does. You just mean, it isn't to your liking. You think that is something is illogical or poor it makes no sense but it makes all the sense in the world. Fools always do what makes sense, they act like fools.

 

[drebo]

The government has pulled it off for auto insurance, linked to the 'privilige' to drive. It's never had this power uncoditionlly that I know of. This could mean the government pays.

That was done by the states, though, not the Federal Government. It's not a federal crime to drive without insurance, it's a STATE crime. The STATES have this ability, the Federal Government does not.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I asked you to come up with some reasons the Republicans are responsible for the shape of the health care legislation and you seem to be unable to do so. You fail at simple thinking. Sad. By the way, the fact that the Democrats have control this minute is totally irrelevant. Can you figure that out also? Probably not. It takes some thinking.

I'll repeat what I said again -- you have nothing. You're not my boss -- please spell out what *you* think are the reasons and we can discuss. If you need help, maybe McOwen can help you.

 

[Darwin333]

It makes absolute sense. It is exactly what will happen and what happens is all that can happen.

It hasn't happened yet so many things can happen but we all know that the right thing will not happen.

Because something will happen, it makes sense that it does.

Something always happens. We know what will happen it is the why that we are discussing.

You just mean, it isn't to your liking.

It is not to anyones likings. The Dems are trying very hard to blame this bill on the Republicans even though they haven't passed the bill yet. Either the Dems wish to give credit for good legislation to the Republicans or the Dems believe this is bad legislation.

You think that is something is illogical or poor it makes no sense but it makes all the sense in the world.

It does make all the sense in the world. Its purely political on both sides of the aisle and in the end the American people are going to suffer because of party politics. Regardless of whose fault it is, that is just plain wrong. Most of the people here are perfectly willing to cause harm and suffering to their fellow countrymen in order for their side to "win". I am not one of them.

Fools always do what makes sense, they act like fools.

Agreed, but when are foolish acts considered more than simply foolish? As an example, voting on a bill that is almost universally seen as bad legislation while proving they think its bad at the same time by blaming the other guys for its content? That has to be some seriously deep self hate.

 

[woolfe9999]

If people who could have afforded insurance but because some unforeseen circumstance find it a hardship are not punished, my objection over this particular issue is no longer valid, and that is the end of it for me.

The mandate does not even apply to people for whom the premiums constitute 8% or more of their income, and in addition there is a case-by-case hardship exemption even when the mandate does apply. So, for example, if your income level is high by you have enomous debt, you can get a hardship exemption.

- wolf

 

[Darwin333]

The mandate does not even apply to people for whom the premiums constitute 8% or more of their income, and in addition there is a case-by-case hardship exemption even when the mandate does apply. So, for example, if your income level is high by you have enomous debt, you can get a hardship exemption.

- wolf

Ahhh, so this whole mandate nonsense is smoke and mirrors? Enormous debt is American as apple pie so the mandate won't apply to the vast majority of us then? I wonder how many people they will have working the phones at the "hardship hotline"?

 

[jonks]

It's right here in black and white. Republicans will be excluded again. I'm looking forward to the lies that bi-partisanship was not possible because the Republicans refused to participate.

Ah yes, the lies that bi-partisanship was not possible when the gop's call to arms was "death panels", "fascism/socialism/marxism", "you lie", "they want to kill your grandma", and "let's make this Obama's waterloo." Damn those Dems for not somehow reaching out in compromise with this open-minded good-faith opposition.

Never mind that almost everything the GOP wanted is in the bill. the public option? gone. End of life counseling? adios (despite being proposed for years by the GOP!) abortion coverage? denied.

They aren't going to vote yes because then they have nothing to run on in '10/12.

 

[jonks]

Well said. States were designed to have most of the power for a reason. Every state is different, and what works for one probably won't work in another. Hence, why states were supposed to have the majority of the power, with a federal government as kind of the glue to keep everything together. That is no longer the case, with the federal government snatching up power left and right. This is not how it was supposed to be. Our forefathers warned about one large, ominous, all-powerful government looming over us all.

lol, i love when you cite the Founding Fathers. Do you know what the Federalists were? Ever heard of John Adams or Alexander Hamilton? Do you know which policies guided George Washington's administration? Are you aware that there was actually, hold onto your hat, some disagreement among the men who founded our country?

Thanks for telling us how it was "supposed to be."

 

[boomerang]

Ah yes, the lies that bi-partisanship was not possible when the gop's call to arms was "death panels", "fascism/socialism/marxism", "you lie", "they want to kill your grandma", and "let's make this Obama's waterloo." Damn those Dems for not somehow reaching out in compromise with this open-minded good-faith opposition.

Never mind that almost everything the GOP wanted is in the bill. the public option? gone. End of life counseling? adios (despite being proposed for years by the GOP!) abortion coverage? denied.

They aren't going to vote yes because then they have nothing to run on in '10/12.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[jonks]

Thanks for sharing.

You're welcome, and thanks for that articulate response, even if somewhat lacking in substance.

Quick recap:
You: I'm looking forward to the lies that bi-partisanship was not possible because the Republicans refused to participate.

Me: cites litany of GOP doomsday obstruction hyperbole

You: ....

 

[GuitarDaddy]

The majority also has to take on the FULL responsibility of the results of what they chose to create.

Since they have cut out the opponents; then they can not blame the opponents for any failures that may happen.

Reid and Pelosi had stated that they were not going to worry about input from the minority. It was their way no matter what.

Now the Dems will have to explain and be held accountable for what boondoogle that they may have crafted

Acountablity Yes the dems will be reponsible for whats in the bill, and the repubs for whats not, and don't even try and pretend the GOP didn't successfully kill major portions of the bill.

And speaking of accountability when will the repubs be held accountable for Iraq, Medicare part D and the financial colapse? They won't! The term accountable and politics are mutually exclusive, there is no accountability in Washington

 

[StageLeft]

instead, the dems are perfectly happy to pass a bad bill for purely partisan reasons and to give obama something to tout at the state of the union. Granted, the reps would be perfectly happy to kill the bill for the same partisan reasons but at this point i would rather no bill than the clusterfuck of a bill we are gonna get.

Once again you bastards in both parties are fucking over the american people for the sole reason of saying your side "won" regardless of how bad americans lose. Good job, we appreciate it.

qft

 

[EagleKeeper]

Acountablity Yes the dems will be responsible for whats in the bill, and the repubs for whats not, and don't even try and pretend the GOP didn't successfully kill major portions of the bill.

And speaking of accountability when will the repubs be held accountable for Iraq, Medicare part D and the financial collapse? They won't! The term accountable and politics are mutually exclusive, there is no accountability in Washington

Inside the beltway, there is no accountability.

As the Dems wanted to crow (House and Senate); they had the ability to push through without Republican consent what they wanted in the bill. What that was in the original concept(s) of a bill that was killed was due to the Dems feeling that it could not pass the Democratic muster if they discounted any Republican support.

Iraq is a foreign issue; with the exception of the body bags; few are caring.
Obama stated he was getting the US out of Iraq - therefore is anyone is going to be held accountable in elections time, it will be him.

The financial collapse is considered to be a problem of people living beyond their means, government lack of regulation, etc.

People/voters (when time comes for punishment/reward) do not delineate between government itself and what political party existed before.

When it comes time to pull the lever; those that are in power are held accountable - people gave those in power a chance to correct all the mistakes over the past 2/4/6 years. If they did not; then they are vulnerable. If they screwed the pooch, they are gone.

So if in November; people feel that their pockets are being picked by empty promises; they will retaliate. They knew their pockets were going to be picked, but were promised that in doing so, everything would be fixed within a short time. If the problems are not fixed, watch out.

This is also one reason that the Health Care bill is staged to go into effect within a couple of years (after 2010). This way the current politcal crop may not have to be held responsible and it allows correction of issues that should have been dealt with up front, but are to hot to handle properly within the forced time schedule.

 

[Fern]

Uhhh, no.

I'll put my comments in bold so I don't have to chop your post into multiple pieces.

Not to mention the health care is subsidized for everyone under 4x the poverty line...

I saw someone ask about "how costs will be reduced".

1. Mandating coverage stops the revolving door emergency room loophole that drives up costs enormously for those with the ability to pay.
There is no rule that says people with HI can't go to the emergency room. There is no evidence that those who go to the emergency room for non-emergency care will now have their behavior magically changed by having insurance. There is no explanation why care given at the emergency room costs more than care given elsewhere. There is no explanation why the emergency rooms can't turn away (send to outpatient facility) those with non-emergencies.

2. Giving basic care to the poor will enable them to get preventative care instead of emergency-room only coverage.
(1) the poor are already covered by Medicaid, that won't change under the bill. (2) The CBO released a report on preventive care citing numerous studies by groups such as the AMA demonstrating that preventative care actually increases costs


3. Covering all americans will dramatically reduce bankruptcies in the US.
If you get major medical problems you're still likely to go into bankruptcy, people with those kinds of problems can't work. Major medical expenses will not be reduced. They cost what they cost. Either the hospital writes it off and the costs are spread over other patients etc, or the insurance company pays it and the costs are spread over other patients/HI customers. There's no substitive difference with or without this bill.


4. Insurance companies will no longer be shielded from anti-monopoly laws. The SEC can prosecute them for price-fixing and muscling startups out of the market.
If you're claiming that insurance companies are currently shielded from "anti-monopoly laws" please provide a link. BTW, all info published to-date on this bill indicates substantial increase in HI premium costs under the current bills.


5. The bill is paid for and will not have a massive deficit a la medicare.
Medicaid doesn't reimburse hospitals for those people who don't pay their bills. Medicaid is just HI for the poor. This doesn't affect Medicaid other than to increase those who qualify. Contrary to your assertion Medicaid costs will therefor increase.

Fern (bolded remarks are mine)

 

[werepossum]

Acountablity Yes the dems will be reponsible for whats in the bill, and the repubs for whats not, and don't even try and pretend the GOP didn't successfully kill major portions of the bill.

And speaking of accountability when will the repubs be held accountable for Iraq, Medicare part D and the financial colapse? They won't! The term accountable and politics are mutually exclusive, there is no accountability in Washington

The Democrats need not a single Republican vote to pass anything they wish. Therefore the only way the Republicans can kill anything is to bring to light something so horrid, so unpopular, so out of step with the American public, that even Democrats will be ashamed to support it. Oddly, you seem to think (sorry, feel) that this is a bad thing.

Fern, you're forgetting the government end-of-life counselors. Telling old people "C'mon you selfish old geezer, you're going to die soon anyway so just go straight to the stupid hospice now" (as per Obama's campaign statements that more and more people will be choosing hospice) = big savings!

 

[Moonbeam]

I'll repeat what I said again -- you have nothing. You're not my boss -- please spell out what *you* think are the reasons and we can discuss. If you need help, maybe McOwen can help you.

Stick it in your ear. You can't rub two neurons together to make a cogent thought. There's no hope at all for a conversation. You are simply too stupid to bother with, sorry.

Now tell me, can you think of any way the Republicans may have influenced the course of health care legislation or why having a majority means nothing with regard to the decisions that are made. If you can't think of anything don't bother to reply.

 

[Fern]

"If the government determines that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply"

Since when has filling a false income tax return not been subjected to penalties?

Everyone needs to buy health insurance, whether you can afford it or not. If you do not, you are taxed, whether you can afford it or not. If you don't pay the tax you might not be able to afford because of the insurance mandate, then the 250K/jail time kicks in.

You guys have a lot of posts about the new penalty etc, I picked these two for no good reason other than I wanted to comment from a tax professional viewpoint

While I don't belive we can know how this new penalty is going to work until the bill is finalized and we see how it is enforced, I note the following:

1. We don't put redundancies into tax law; it's never done. There's already a perfectly good provision (and Red Dawn cited it) for those who don't willingly pay taxes. Why add in another provision?

2. This new penalty is therefor expressly, and soley, for forcing compliance with the HC bill. I suspect they are doing this because they fear a taxpayer revolt. People could pay their 'regular' income taxes and refuse to comply with forced HI on principle. They need a weapon to stop that. The fact the new penalty (among other things in the bill) is done through taxes is irrelevnt and done merely for administrative convenience. The Dems have decided to force people to purchase HI, this is something radically new.

Fern

 

[boomerang]

I loved the article - I automatically love almost anything quoting Hayek, whose nightmare is coming true - but we should point out that it's not a question of whether or not to have socialism, but rather how much socialism we should have. Few of us would want to live in a purely capitalist society, just as (hopefully) few of us would want to live in a purely socialist society.

I too have the feeling that something really big is about to happen. Obama was very clear in his speeches to adoring fans how he intended to fundamentally transform America; he was almost as clear in his general campaign speeches, he just didn't give any details. (Therefore allowing each person to project his or her own favored change and reform.) And the way things stand today, the Democrats are posed to almost certainly lose the House and quite possibly the Senate, either of which would render Obama's agenda DOA. (Ah, blessed gridlock, hallowed be thy name.) There is always the possibility though that the Democrats believe that if they can get these reforms in place, together with the new agencies and powers, that they can so stress the health care system that its collapse in inevitable. The Democrats will then point to the collapse and say that would not have happened had the Republicans cooperated in "real reform", thereby restoring the Dems to power and ushering in single payer with an actual public mandate.

And I'm still not certain that all this isn't just another page from Saul Alinkski's handbook - spend as much as possible, get as many people on the dole as possible, and make the system catastrophically collapse, and the people will demand communism or at least full-blown socialism.

LMAO Darwin!

Glad you enjoyed the article! You're spot on in most of your analysis IMO. However the Dems will have no need to explain anything. At that point, there will be no one deserving of an explanation.

Alinsky along with Cloward and Piven are leading this charge. Both Alinsky and Cloward from the grave.

 

[werepossum]

You guys have a lot of posts about the new penalty etc, I picked these two for no good reason other than I wanted to comment from a tax professional viewpoint

While I don't belive we can know how this new penalty is going to work until the bill is finalized and we see how it is enforced, I note the following:

1. We don't put redundancies into tax law; it's never done. There's already a perfectly good provision (and Red Dawn cited it) for those who don't willingly pay taxes. Why add in another provision?

2. This new penalty is therefor expressly, and soley, for forcing compliance with the HC bill. I suspect they are doing this because they fear a taxpayer revolt. People could pay their 'regular' income taxes and refuse to comply with forced HI on principle. They need a weapon to stop that. The fact the new penalty (among other things in the bill) is done through taxes is irrelevnt and done merely for administrative convenience. The Dems have decided to force people to purchase HI, this is something radically new.

Fern

It doesn't even matter that the Democrats hate health insurance companies with a passion. It's just that forcing people to do things is too much fun to pass up!

 

[Moonbeam]

Darwin333:

Agreed, but when are foolish acts considered more than simply foolish? As an example, voting on a bill that is almost universally seen as bad legislation while proving they think its bad at the same time by blaming the other guys for its content? That has to be some seriously deep self hate.

Maybe. The only question that interests me, given that whatever health care bill passes if one does pass will be the only one that could pass, will it be a plus or a minus for America in general. I could care less if it isn't liked by the people. I could care less if it could be better. It will be all that was possible and if it proves better for America in the long run, I will settle for that. Politics used to be the art of the possible. The party of death wants to make it the art of making anything impossible.