PDA

View Full Version : Health Care Bill Passes In The House


SteelerEmpire
11-08-2009, 08:34 AM
Only the Senate's vote is left now...... and then its on Obama's desk to sign.

I think we better start looking this up so we can begin to seriously study it as it looks like its gonna be part of our lives.

When did they vote on this thing ? At 3am this morning ?? I wake up at 6:30am and its already all over the headlines....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33748707/ns/politics-health_care_reform/

Steelboy84
11-08-2009, 08:40 AM
There have been so many "bills" proposed and "passed" until I have lost count.

You know something, one would think (no matter what side of the political spectrum you are) that all of these "smart" people, all of these people with their big fancy degrees from these big time schools could come together, discuss ways to make legislation that works for everyone. That's what they're there for, right?

I mean, you have doctors, lawyers, educators, all smart people in Congress (so it seems). So you would think coming together and passing laws that work would be no problem.

xXTheSteelKingsXx
11-08-2009, 08:51 AM
Could be wrong but if the Senate approves the bill doesn't a comittee from both chambers have to combine the two bills before Obama sees it. It is my understanding that the House and Senate bills have a number of differences.

KeiselPower99
11-08-2009, 08:53 AM
The vote happened around 1130 pm last night. I watched it on Cspn. Pelosi was all excited afterwards and it made me sick. We are a country that is broke. We have 17 percent of Americans out of work and now they wanna raise taxes for cap and trade and healthcare. It dosent make a lick of sense to me. The Government is gonna own over 1/3 of industry in this country if this passes. They are gonna moniter vending machines and control our lives!!!!! They are gonna make meat harder to raise and sell and tougher to buy!! Wake up America please!!!!!

HometownGal
11-08-2009, 08:56 AM
Oh YAY. :rolleyes:

Whelp - the only way to voice your opposition and disgust is to hound the living hell out of your Senators and vote out the morons in the House who approved this bill.

Seriously, though, I doubt this bill passes in the Senate. Those fat cats like their cushy lifestyles, big bucks, perks, free medical care and future astronomical pensions too much to risk being given the heave ho by the voters. :jerkit:

X-Terminator
11-08-2009, 09:19 AM
If this POS bill passes, I'm going to hire an attorney. Because I know I'm going to have to fight every step of the way to make sure that my mother continues to receive the care that she does now and not have it rationed because they deem it "too costly". Her life literally depends on it.

Way to go, Democrats. This bill is going to be an albatross around the necks of every American, and you can be damn sure that none of you who voted for this garbage is going to get my vote.

GoSlash27
11-08-2009, 09:43 AM
Had to figure it was gonna pass the House; they don't have filibusters. The Senate is going to be a different story.

It's times like these when I wish the Constitution had been written to classify willful contravention as a capital crime. We could round up everybody who voted for this, take 'em out back, and shoot 'em.

Steelboy84
11-08-2009, 10:32 AM
If this POS bill passes, I'm going to hire an attorney. Because I know I'm going to have to fight every step of the way to make sure that my mother continues to receive the care that she does now and not have it rationed because they deem it "too costly". Her life literally depends on it.

Way to go, Democrats. This bill is going to be an albatross around the necks of every American, and you can be damn sure that none of you who voted for this garbage is going to get my vote.

I think care for the elderly is needed. I think Medicare is one of the best pieces of legislation to pass.

But there are some (conservatives and liberals) who do not like Medicare. So I don't see why they would have a problem with the government cutting into it. They don't even like it in the first place.

Then there are others who say "I don't want the government in my healthcare".......................while sitting at home receiving that same Medicare.

Steelboy84
11-08-2009, 10:36 AM
The vote happened around 1130 pm last night. I watched it on Cspn. Pelosi was all excited afterwards and it made me sick. We are a country that is broke. We have 17 percent of Americans out of work and now they wanna raise taxes for cap and trade and healthcare. It dosent make a lick of sense to me. The Government is gonna own over 1/3 of industry in this country if this passes. They are gonna moniter vending machines and control our lives!!!!! They are gonna make meat harder to raise and sell and tougher to buy!! Wake up America please!!!!!

Well, the government already controls 1/3 of our economy because consumer spending only accounts for 2/3, or around 66%.

Vincent
11-08-2009, 10:51 AM
It's times like these when I wish the Constitution had been written to classify willful contravention as a capital crime. We could round up everybody who voted for this, take 'em out back, and shoot 'em.

I would support such an amendment. :mad:

GBMelBlount
11-08-2009, 10:59 AM
I mean, you have doctors, lawyers, educators, all smart people in Congress (so it seems). So you would think coming together and passing laws that work would be no problem.

I don't know Steelboy, seems to me most politicians are attorneys who have learned how to make and twist the laws for their own personal gain.

Most of them do NOT have much entrepreneurial or business experience involving creating or making anything that is the essence of capitalism and free markets to the point where they understand how and why things really work in a free country.

And as for your mention of teachers, the vast majority of teachers don't understand FIRST HAND how capitalism and free markets REALLY work.

Unless you are an entrepreneur, or have owned & run businesses it is VERY hard to comprehend.

We need more successful businessmen and entrepreneurs in politics imo, NOT simply attorneys, teachers and scholars.

Steelboy84
11-08-2009, 11:04 AM
I don't know Steelboy, seems to me most politicians are attorneys who have learned how to make and twist the laws for their own personal gain.

Most of them do NOT have much entrepreneurial or business experience involving creating or making anything that is the essence of capitalism and free markets to the point where they understand how and why things really work in a free country.

And as for your mention of teachers, the vast majority of teachers don't understand FIRST HAND how capitalism and free markets REALLY work.

Unless you are an entrepreneur, have owned & run businesses it is very hard to comprehend.

We need more successful businessman and entrepreneurs in politics imo.


Can't argue there.

On a side note, Ray Lewis looks like a d*mn wolf on NFL N.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Fire Haley
11-08-2009, 11:10 AM
Welcome to the Barack Hussein Obama wing of the Nancy Pelosi Government Hospital

http://www.directrelief.org/uploadedImages/Where_We_Work/Countries/Somalia/Hargeisa%20Hospital-Somalia%20(Somaliland).JPG

MACH1
11-08-2009, 11:11 AM
So much for our "Freedoms". This ought to go a long way in fuking us.

Change you can believe in!

Vincent
11-08-2009, 11:43 AM
Welcome to the Barack Hussein Obama wing of the Nancy Pelosi Government Hospital

http://www.directrelief.org/uploadedImages/Where_We_Work/Countries/Somalia/Hargeisa%20Hospital-Somalia%20(Somaliland).JPG

What a splendid and cheerful ward. Fresh paint too. We should all be grateful to Madam Speaker and our beloved Leader.

GoSlash27
11-08-2009, 12:40 PM
Just a reminder not to panic. We're not really screwed unless this mess makes it past the Senate (I don't think it will).
And if it does, it's not your health care you'll have to worry about, it'll be the economy.

tony hipchest
11-08-2009, 01:29 PM
Unless you are an entrepreneur, or have owned & run businesses it is VERY hard to comprehend.

We need more successful businessmen and entrepreneurs in politics imo, NOT simply attorneys, teachers and scholars.

if it is that simple, and the quick solution is so obvious, why do you think none of these successful businessmen and entrepreneurs, give up their businesses and lucrative profits, and serve their country in public office for a much smaller paycheck?

if they were all as patriotic as you make them sound, wouldnt they do this in a heartbeat for the salvation of our country?

GBMelBlount
11-08-2009, 01:35 PM
if it is that simple, and the quick solution is so obvious, why do you think none of these successful businessmen and entrepreneurs, give up their businesses and lucrative profits, and serve their country in public office for a much smaller paycheck?

if they were all as patriotic as you make them sound, wouldnt they do this in a heartbeat for the salvation of our country?

No, unfortunately they usually get eaten alive by the corrupt & sleazy attorneys and career politicians (and media). :chuckle:

43Hitman
11-08-2009, 04:43 PM
if it is that simple, and the quick solution is so obvious, why do you think none of these successful businessmen and entrepreneurs, give up their businesses and lucrative profits, and serve their country in public office for a much smaller paycheck?

if they were all as patriotic as you make them sound, wouldnt they do this in a heartbeat for the salvation of our country?

This one is so easy a caveman could do it. Your answer; GREED. That's what all this really boils down to in the end. Greed. Greed will be the reason this nation fails, nothing more and nothing less.

I-Want-Troy's-Hair
11-08-2009, 07:14 PM
These are the same people that can't get a vaccine out for swine flu.....oh I mean H1N1. This bill also has a "penalty" that you will encure on your taxes if you don't get the insurance, if you don't pay that penalty they can cart your ass off to jail for 5 years.

"REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUALS: Individuals must have insurance, enforced through a tax penalty of 2.5 percent of income. People can apply for hardship waivers if coverage is unaffordable."

the next question is to ass both congress and the senate if they are going to be covered under this "sweeping plan" you answer will be a BIG FAT NO.

This bill will have to pass the Senate also and currently they don't have the votes to pass this in the senate so start calling and hammering on your senators. Those Bastard*

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091108/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_comparing_the_bills_4

Godfather
11-08-2009, 08:42 PM
We need to attack this garbage from both sides. Nader and Kucinich are calling out Pelosicare as a sop to the fat cats (and I agree with that)...take that angle and see if we can get Bernie Sanders to filibuster. The individual mandate is downright criminal, and it will serve only to drive premiums through the roof like it did in Massachusetts.

We also need the tea partiers and fiscal conservatives to attack from the right and try to get the Blue Dogs to say no.

Godfather
11-08-2009, 08:43 PM
This one is so easy a caveman could do it. Your answer; GREED. That's what all this really boils down to in the end. Greed. Greed will be the reason this nation fails, nothing more and nothing less.

So true.

There's an unspoken arrangement that you spend your legislative career giving taxpayer money to a special interest, and they hire you at an exorbitant salary when you leave Congress.

HometownGal
11-08-2009, 08:56 PM
I think care for the elderly is needed. I think Medicare is one of the best pieces of legislation to pass.

But there are some (conservatives and liberals) who do not like Medicare. So I don't see why they would have a problem with the government cutting into it. They don't even like it in the first place.

Then there are others who say "I don't want the government in my healthcare".......................while sitting at home receiving that same Medicare.

Medicare isn't just for the elderly - it is also for the disabled who are physically unable to work any longer and who have more than earned the right to assistance by having kicked into the system all of the years they were employed. Unfortunately, however, when a person is deemed totally disabled by the SSA, they must endure a 2 year waiting period to receive Medicare which is absolutely LUDICROUS. The SSA makes people jump through hoop after hoop after hoop to even be approved for disability and most people are denied the first go-around. What frosts my ass is that a low life scumbag on welfare who can work but prefers to allow the taxpayers and government foot the bill for his/her medical/dental/optical expenses doesn't have to wait - the majority of the time, they are approved for FREE medical insurance as soon as they are approved for cash assistance and food stamps. For most people, Medicare isn't free. I am disabled because of the massive radiation and chemotherapy I received in 2002 which fried a lot of my short term memory which was paramount in my career as a paralegal, and I pay almost $100.00 a month for my Medicare coverage in addition to the money I fork out every month for secondary insurance to the Medicare benefits. Believe me - I'm not complaing about the cost - I'm furious about the government not cutting welfare benefits and wanting to cut the Medicare benefits that are a necessity to those of us who have worked all of our lives and have heavily contributed to the system but can't work because of our disabilities. :banging: :mad:

MasterOfPuppets
11-08-2009, 09:59 PM
http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/6690/20070319panicbutton.jpg (http://img682.imageshack.us/i/20070319panicbutton.jpg/)

MACH1
11-08-2009, 11:00 PM
Medicare isn't just for the elderly - it is also for the disabled who are physically unable to work any longer and who have more than earned the right to assistance by having kicked into the system all of the years they were employed. Unfortunately, however, when a person is deemed totally disabled by the SSA, they must endure a 2 year waiting period to receive Medicare which is absolutely LUDICROUS. The SSA makes people jump through hoop after hoop after hoop to even be approved for disability and most people are denied the first go-around. What frosts my ass is that a low life scumbag on welfare who can work but prefers to allow the taxpayers and government foot the bill for his/her medical/dental/optical expenses doesn't have to wait - the majority of the time, they are approved for FREE medical insurance as soon as they are approved for cash assistance and food stamps. For most people, Medicare isn't free. I am disabled because of the massive radiation and chemotherapy I received in 2002 which fried a lot of my short term memory which was paramount in my career as a paralegal, and I pay almost $100.00 a month for my Medicare coverage in addition to the money I fork out every month for secondary insurance to the Medicare benefits. Believe me - I'm not complaing about the cost - I'm furious about the government not cutting welfare benefits and wanting to cut the Medicare benefits that are a necessity to those of us who have worked all of our lives and have heavily contributed to the system but can't work because of our disabilities. :banging: :mad:

Yep and if you think thats bad try getting Medicaid!

revefsreleets
11-09-2009, 08:06 AM
This POS only passed 220-215, and congresspeople often hide in the masses when they vote. That's not so easy to do in the Senate.

As Lindsey Graham correctly pointed out, this bill was "Dead on Arrival" in the Senate. They need all 58 D's to pass it, PLUS the two Independents who caucus with the Democrat's, and Lieberman already said "Hells no!". I'd say it's probably at LEAST 20 votes shy of getting passed in it's current incarnation, so I wouldn't worry too much about it.

KeiselPower99
11-09-2009, 08:09 AM
Isnt there a vote that the Senate can use where they only need 51 votes?

revefsreleets
11-09-2009, 08:53 AM
Yes, they can "fast-track" legislation using budget rules and pass it with a simple majority (51 votes) as opposed to a supermajority (60 votes). This "reconciliation" vote allows the Senate to forego fillibustering.

But there are restraints on this, and it would strip the effectiveness of the legislation. What's more, I don't think they even have 51, so it's probably a dead issue.

MACH1
11-09-2009, 10:25 AM
Isnt there a vote that the Senate can use where they only need 51 votes?

Yes, Its called the nuclear option.

The Senate does not restrict the total time allowed for debate; instead, a motion for cloture must be passed to end debate. A three-fifths majority (60 Senators), is required to approve the cloture motion and proceed to a vote on the main issue. Thus, although a bill might have majority support, a minority of 41 Senators can prevent a final vote, effectively defeating the bill. In practice, if it is clear that the motion for cloture will not carry, the bill may simply be tabled so that the Senate can conduct other business. From time to time, however, the margin of votes for cloture may be very close, and the minority may wish to stall the cloture vote for as long as possible. Because debate time is unlimited, Senators may simply speak endlessly on the Senate floor to prevent a vote from taking place; this tactic is known as a filibuster. A formal change to the Senate's rules is even more difficult to make: Senate rule 22 says that such a change requires a two-thirds majority of those present and voting to end debate (67 votes if all senators vote).[2]

A point of order is a parliamentary motion used to remind the body of its written rules and established precedents, usually when a particular rule or precedent is not being followed. When a senator raises a point of order, the presiding officer of the Senate immediately rules on the validity of the point of order, but this ruling may be appealed and reversed by the whole Senate. Ordinarily, a point of order compels the Senate to follow its rules and precedents; however, the Senate may choose to vote down the point of order. When this occurs, a new precedent is established, and the old rule or precedent no longer governs Senate procedure. Similarly, it is possible to raise a point of order and state that the standard procedure of the Senate is actually different than the current rules and precedents suggest. If this point of order is sustained, a new precedent is established, and it controls Senate procedure thenceforth.

The nuclear option is used in response to a filibuster or other dilatory tactic. A senator makes a point of order calling for an immediate vote on the measure before the body, outlining what circumstances allow for this. The presiding officer of the Senate, usually the vice president of the United States or the president pro tempore, makes a parliamentary ruling upholding the senator's point of order. The Constitution is cited at this point, since otherwise the presiding officer is bound by precedent. A supporter of the filibuster may challenge the ruling by asking, "Is the decision of the Chair to stand as the judgment of the Senate?" This is referred to as "appealing from the Chair." An opponent of the filibuster will then move to table the appeal. As tabling is non-debatable, a vote is held immediately. A simple majority decides the issue. If the appeal is successfully tabled, then the presiding officer's ruling that the filibuster is unconstitutional is thereby upheld. Thus a simple majority is able to cut off debate, and the Senate moves to a vote on the substantive issue under consideration. The effect of the nuclear option is not limited to the single question under consideration, as it would be in a cloture vote. Rather, the nuclear option effects a change in the operational rules of the Senate, so that the filibuster or dilatory tactic would thereafter be barred by the new precedent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option

KeiselPower99
11-09-2009, 10:27 AM
If it passes it will be through the 51 votes. Even still this 2000 page bill is a joke. 700 billion in new taxes during a recession.

GoSlash27
11-11-2009, 05:38 PM
The reconciliation option may look pretty tempting to them. Gut it like a fish, pass it, then put all the garbage back in afterwards when they reconcile the house and senate versions. They do have the votes to pass it in a straight up vote. They just don't have a supermajority.
The nuclear option is a lot more dangerous, because they know that the filibuster is lost forever once they do that, and they're not so foolish as to assume they're going to be in the majority forever.

revefsreleets
11-12-2009, 08:04 AM
I'm not so sure they have 51...straight party line voting is only going to net them 58, Lieberman already said no, so they only have one possible Independent vote, and SEVERAL blue dogs don't like this legislation....It would be close if they voted on it today. I'd say it wouldn't go through, but they'd only miss by a few votes...

sixstringlass
11-12-2009, 11:18 PM
These are the same people that can't get a vaccine out for swine flu.....oh I mean H1N1. This bill also has a "penalty" that you will encure on your taxes if you don't get the insurance, if you don't pay that penalty they can cart your ass off to jail for 5 years.

"REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUALS: Individuals must have insurance, enforced through a tax penalty of 2.5 percent of income. People can apply for hardship waivers if coverage is unaffordable."

the next question is to ass both congress and the senate if they are going to be covered under this "sweeping plan" you answer will be a BIG FAT NO.

This bill will have to pass the Senate also and currently they don't have the votes to pass this in the senate so start calling and hammering on your senators. Those Bastard*

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091108/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_comparing_the_bills_4


THIS. This is the important part of why this legislation is crap. It's not even more government control; it's another boon for the insurance industry. This mandate is a lot like the laws that state that we all have to have auto insurance... except that we can't avoid buying health insurance like we can car insurance. If we don't want car insurance, we can always, you know, not have a car or not drive. But there's no option on the health care insurance we're going to be required to have; it's not like we can opt out of living.

This appears to be just another way to make corporations richer at our expense. According to The Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123792957033830221.html), at least two insurance giants offered the government a deal back in March 2009 that basically said that they would stop charging sick people more and denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions if the government would create a law that forced all Americans to buy health insurance. They have, apparently, gotten their wish.

This is a HUGE boon for the insurance industry. They now have access to more than 200 million customers, 47 million of which they did not have before. While some of those will get covered by the bill's extended Medicare coverage, and others will be able to get subsidies, most middle-class families will end up paying between $600 and $1,400 per month for health insurance that will potentially be required by law.

By the way, the penalty, apparently, for NOT buying this insurance is a 2.5% tax on your federal tax return. Failing to pay that leads to charges filed by the IRS, which means that you can face tax evasion penalties up to $250,000 and up to 5 years in prison.

Nice.

And the media seems to be playing right into this. They are calling it a major victory for the poor and underprivileged in this country, and yet, it's those exact people that this law (if it passes the Senate) will hit the hardest. Most middle-class Americans - in this recession and with unemployment rates skyrocketing daily - can barely afford necessities now, much less after being forced to pay more money for health insurance that the law will now require them to have. And the media outlets are not providing a whole lot of information on this. Where are the cost calculators to help us determine whether this is a good deal? How does anyone know what "150% of poverty level" means? What exactly are these subsidies for the new requirements, how much will they pay, and who will qualify for them? No one seems to know. In fact, the numbers I've trotted out here are only averages from the 100 or so articles I read about this. No one actually seems to know what the cost to each American will be if this albatross passes. No one seems to know (or at least is not reporting on it if they do) if those penalties are real or if they're propaganda by the bill's opponents. No one seems to know how much this is going to cost the people, except from the viewpoint of taxes. While the media focuses us on "death panels," "rationing," and "waiting lists," what we really need to focus on is the fact that this is legislation bought and paid for by the insurance lobby.

Based on the fact that there are about 200 million people in the US and the quoted cost per family of about $600 per month, the insurance industry - which, last year, made $60 billion in profits - now stands to make about $120 billion per MONTH.

This country does need health care for everyone. But this is NOT health care. This is a law intended to further pad the pockets of the insurance companies, and I, for one, don't like it one bit.

MACH1
11-12-2009, 11:48 PM
What a sweeeet deal. I can't wait for my FREE health care.

fansince'76
11-12-2009, 11:55 PM
What a sweeeet deal. I can't wait for my FREE health care.

Well, uh, it's not really free, uh, but, uh, you can get a government subsidy (funded by your and my tax dollars, of course) to help ya pay for it! Change we can believe in! Woohoo! :chicken:

MACH1
11-12-2009, 11:57 PM
If I'm a jobless bum then it'll be free.

revefsreleets
11-13-2009, 08:21 AM
The CEO of the Cleveland Clinic (a literal model for how Hospital's should be run), came out and said the plan was so flawed it would need completely re-worked in just a few years.

That's hardly a ringing endorsement...

SteelerEmpire
11-13-2009, 08:38 AM
I'm not so sure they have 51...straight party line voting is only going to net them 58, Lieberman already said no, so they only have one possible Independent vote, and SEVERAL blue dogs don't like this legislation....It would be close if they voted on it today. I'd say it wouldn't go through, but they'd only miss by a few votes...

------------------------------------
The strategy the White House is using is to not write up a single, cast in stone health care bill. Their using a method of a parallel to what lawyers use to win cases that have a lot of resistance for their side/client(s). Which is this:
Don't write out a "single" health care bill, have one that stands a good chance to get passed in the House. Then "change it or alter it " so that theirs one that has a good chance to get passed in the Senate. Then "change it or alter it " so theirs one that has a good chance to get passed when both the House and Senate has their combined, final vote.
Ever wonder why there are so many health care bills (and not just one).... now we know.....

You almost can't lose with that strategy.....

KeiselPower99
11-13-2009, 09:00 AM
I heard yesterday that in the Senate bill they are gonna add a plan to cover dogs. Wondering if anyone else had heard that. Cleveland Clinic is in the top 5 best hospitals in the country maybe world and they realize how crappy the deal is.

Godfather
11-13-2009, 10:43 AM
I heard yesterday that in the Senate bill they are gonna add a plan to cover dogs. Wondering if anyone else had heard that. Cleveland Clinic is in the top 5 best hospitals in the country maybe world and they realize how crappy the deal is.

There's a GOP congressman from Georgia who proposed a deduction of up to $3500 a yer for veterinary expenses. That might be what you're thinking of.