Get Ready for Congress to Tell Us ...

[VaYank5150]

It's rather suspicious the way Toyota was targeted after the Feds took over GM and Chrysler.

Just sayin'.

In other words, you can't answer my question because you have NO FUCKING CLUE about the link you posted and are now trying to slink away to go spam some other thread with your bullshit. Just sayin'.

 

[MarcATL]

The economy was TANKING way BEFORE Herr Bush left office, it started around mid to late '05.

People started losing jobs like crazy.

Thanks to the RW so-called "pro-business/pro-economic" policies.

You RW FOOLS!!!

 

[driveby]

I can't believe that people can look at what this Congress is doing and not be horrified. What right in the United States of America does Congress have to demand that CEO'S of PRIVATE companies stand before them and explain themselves. IRS audit maybe.. but CONGRESS? People better open their eyes.

Democrats threaten companies hit hard by health care bill
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
March 28, 2010
Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, has summoned some of the nation's top executives to Capitol Hill to defend their assessment that the new national health care reform law will cost their companies hundreds of millions of dollars in health insurance expenses. Waxman is also demanding that the executives give lawmakers internal company documents related to health care finances -- a move one committee Republican describes as "an attempt to intimidate and silence opponents of the Democrats' flawed health care reform legislation."


Read more at the Washington Examiner: Democrats threaten companies hit hard by health care bill | Washington Examiner

I for one, cannot wait to hear CAT explain their $100M first year impact. Hopefully, THIS gets put on C-SPAN!

They can't, they'll be playing reruns of the healthcare negotiations.....

 

[hboats]

I can't believe that people can look at what this Congress is doing and not be horrified. What right in the United States of America does Congress have to demand that CEO'S of PRIVATE companies stand before them and explain themselves. IRS audit maybe.. but CONGRESS? People better open their eyes.

Democrats threaten companies hit hard by health care bill
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
March 28, 2010
Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, has summoned some of the nation's top executives to Capitol Hill to defend their assessment that the new national health care reform law will cost their companies hundreds of millions of dollars in health insurance expenses. Waxman is also demanding that the executives give lawmakers internal company documents related to health care finances -- a move one committee Republican describes as "an attempt to intimidate and silence opponents of the Democrats' flawed health care reform legislation."



Read more at the Washington Examiner: Democrats threaten companies hit hard by health care bill | Washington Examiner

I was embarrassed by the way that our elected official treated the executives from Toyota when they were on The Hill. There were times during that horrible display by our representatives that if I were those executives from Toyota, I would have walked out of that little dog and pony show.

I also find it quite embarrassing that our esteemed President has a "pay czar" who can go to companies in our country and tell them what their CEO's can be paid. If that's not government control, I don't know what is.

Rick

Either you work for Toyota or you are just a complete idiot? When it was the Federal Government who answered (with our tax dollars) when these banks and insurance companies came crying for cash, why SHOULDN'T they be allowed to answer to us?

They bailed out Toyota? Please tell me exactly when that happened.

Rick

 

[saveliberty]

The economy was TANKING way BEFORE Herr Bush left office, it started around mid to late '05.

People started losing jobs like crazy.

Thanks to the RW so-called "pro-business/pro-economic" policies.

You RW FOOLS!!!

United States GDP - real growth rate - Economy

GDP
2006 = +3.2%
2007 =+3.2%
2008 = +2.0%
2009 = +1.1%
2010 = -2.4%

Where can I find the unemployment rate for previous years?

Unemployment

2005 = 5.1%
2006 = 4.6%
2007 = 4.6%
2008 = 5.8%
2009 = 9.3%
2010 = ??

marcATL, consider this your wake up you lieing ass alert.

 

[VaYank5150]

I was embarrassed by the way that our elected official treated the executives from Toyota when they were on The Hill. There were times during that horrible display by our representatives that if I were those executives from Toyota, I would have walked out of that little dog and pony show.

I also find it quite embarrassing that our esteemed President has a "pay czar" who can go to companies in our country and tell them what their CEO's can be paid. If that's not government control, I don't know what is.

Rick

Either you work for Toyota or you are just a complete idiot? When it was the Federal Government who answered (with our tax dollars) when these banks and insurance companies came crying for cash, why SHOULDN'T they be allowed to answer to us?

They bailed out Toyota? Please tell me exactly when that happened.

Rick

They didn't as you well know. I was ATTEMPTING to answer BOTH points raised in your crazy post. Do try to keep up, will you?

 

[hboats]

Either you work for Toyota or you are just a complete idiot? When it was the Federal Government who answered (with our tax dollars) when these banks and insurance companies came crying for cash, why SHOULDN'T they be allowed to answer to us?

They bailed out Toyota? Please tell me exactly when that happened.

Rick

They didn't as you well know. I was ATTEMPTING to answer BOTH points raised in your crazy post. Do try to keep up, will you?

Well, you did a piss poor job.

Did you even watch that embarrassment when the Toyota executives were on The Hill? Somehow I doubt it, or you wouldn't question why I posted what I did. And no, I do not work for Toyota, I've never even owned a Toyota vehicle. But it was still embarrassing.

Rick

 

[Si modo]

... that it's all the corporations' fault that they cannot hire people or even keep those they have employed. Certainly the coming increases in unemployment and corporate flight offshore cannot have anything to do with any legislation or government oppression.

Waxman has summoned the CEOs of corporations who DARED to criticize the bill for costing them too much. The public flogging starts April 21st.

AT&T, Deere CEOs Called by Waxman to Back Up Health-Bill Costs
March 27, 2010, 7:28 PM EDT

By Viola Gienger

March 27 (Bloomberg) -- Representative Henry Waxman called the chief executive officers of AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc., Caterpillar Inc. and Deere & Co. to provide evidence to support costs the companies plan to book related to the new health-care law.

Waxman of California, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and subcommittee Chairman Bart Stupak of Michigan released letters they wrote to the executives, saying their plans to record expenses against earnings as a result of the law contradict other estimates. The lawmakers requested the executives appear at hearing Stupak plans on April 21.

....

AT&T, Deere CEOs Called by Waxman to Back Up Health-Bill Costs - BusinessWeek

The intimidation starts.

(Waxman sent the summons Saturday night, too. He be bad, eh?)

When did asking for proof become intimidation?

No asking, demanding. See, there is this thing called the Constitution and in it is something about search and seizures. The number four comes to mind for some reason.

 

[Si modo]

If that is the case where you work, then it seems to me you made a poor choice of who to work for.

Thats what I love about this country. I can quit whenever I want and I can accept an offer with whomever I want.

....

Productivity has increased per person across the board, while rates of pay have stayed the same or decreased.

Linky and/or source?

 

[hboats]

I can't believe that people can look at what this Congress is doing and not be horrified. What right in the United States of America does Congress have to demand that CEO'S of PRIVATE companies stand before them and explain themselves. IRS audit maybe.. but CONGRESS? People better open their eyes.

Democrats threaten companies hit hard by health care bill
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
March 28, 2010
Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, has summoned some of the nation's top executives to Capitol Hill to defend their assessment that the new national health care reform law will cost their companies hundreds of millions of dollars in health insurance expenses. Waxman is also demanding that the executives give lawmakers internal company documents related to health care finances -- a move one committee Republican describes as "an attempt to intimidate and silence opponents of the Democrats' flawed health care reform legislation."



Read more at the Washington Examiner: Democrats threaten companies hit hard by health care bill | Washington Examiner

I was embarrassed by the way that our elected official treated the executives from Toyota when they were on The Hill. There were times during that horrible display by our representatives that if I were those executives from Toyota, I would have walked out of that little dog and pony show.

I also find it quite embarrassing that our esteemed President has a "pay czar" who can go to companies in our country and tell them what their CEO's can be paid. If that's not government control, I don't know what is.

Rick

Either you work for Toyota or you are just a complete idiot? When it was the Federal Government who answered (with our tax dollars) when these banks and insurance companies came crying for cash, why SHOULDN'T they be allowed to answer to us?

And btw, in case you didn't know, the bank and insurance company executives who's companies were bailed out are not answering to US. They are answering to a President appointed "pay czar." There is a HUGE difference. But either one is way overstepping government bounds.

Rick

 

[Si modo]

The economy was TANKING way BEFORE Herr Bush left office, it started around mid to late '05.

People started losing jobs like crazy.

Thanks to the RW so-called "pro-business/pro-economic" policies.

You RW FOOLS!!!

And unemployment will increase because of this healthca...I mean, jobs bill.

 

[VaYank5150]

They bailed out Toyota? Please tell me exactly when that happened.

Rick

They didn't as you well know. I was ATTEMPTING to answer BOTH points raised in your crazy post. Do try to keep up, will you?

Well, you did a piss poor job.

Did you even watch that embarrassment when the Toyota executives were on The Hill? Somehow I doubt it, or you wouldn't question why I posted what I did. And no, I do not work for Toyota, I've never even owned a Toyota vehicle. But it was still embarrassing.

Rick

For sticking up for the American people? How patriotic of you...

 

[Samson]

As I keep reminding people:

The Nanny State is morphing into The Bully State.

The children ARE NOT BEHAVING!!!

 

[jeffrockit]

The intimidation starts.

(Waxman sent the summons Saturday night, too. He be bad, eh?)

When did asking for proof become intimidation?

Other than tax reports, where does the govt get the power to ask private business to prove something? This is still a free country, right?

 

[Ravi]

... that it's all the corporations' fault that they cannot hire people or even keep those they have employed. Certainly the coming increases in unemployment and corporate flight offshore cannot have anything to do with any legislation or government oppression.

Waxman has summoned the CEOs of corporations who DARED to criticize the bill for costing them too much. The public flogging starts April 21st.

AT&T, Deere CEOs Called by Waxman to Back Up Health-Bill Costs - BusinessWeek

The intimidation starts.

(Waxman sent the summons Saturday night, too. He be bad, eh?)

When did asking for proof become intimidation?

No asking, demanding. See, there is this thing called the Constitution and in it is something about search and seizures. The number four comes to mind for some reason.

Read your own link. The law maker requested.

There is nothing wrong with investigating claims by corporations to find out if they are true or not. Do a little reading. Here, some easily understood info from wikipedia.

Investigative hearings

Investigative hearings share some of the characteristics of legislative and oversight hearings. The difference lies in Congress’s stated determination to investigate, usually when there is a suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of public officials acting in their official capacity, or private citizens whose activities suggest the need for a legislative remedy. Congress’s authority to investigate is broad and it has exercised this authority since the earliest days of the republic. Its most famous inquiries are benchmarks in American history: Credit Mobilier, Teapot Dome, Army-McCarthy, Watergate, and Iran-Contra. Investigative hearings often lead to legislation to address the problems uncovered. Judicial activities in the same area of Congress’s investigation may precede, run simultaneously with, or follow such inquiries.

Subpoenas and depositions

Most individuals respond favorably to an invitation to testify, believing it to be a valuable opportunity to communicate and publicize their views on a question of public policy. However, if a person will not come by invitation alone, a committee or subcommittee may require an appearance through the issuance of a subpoena (Rule XXVI, paragraph 1). Committees also may subpoena correspondence, books, papers, and other documents. Subpoenas are issued infrequently, and most often in the course of investigative hearings.

 

[hboats]

They didn't as you well know. I was ATTEMPTING to answer BOTH points raised in your crazy post. Do try to keep up, will you?

Well, you did a piss poor job.

Did you even watch that embarrassment when the Toyota executives were on The Hill? Somehow I doubt it, or you wouldn't question why I posted what I did. And no, I do not work for Toyota, I've never even owned a Toyota vehicle. But it was still embarrassing.

Rick

For sticking up for the American people? How patriotic of you...

Why didn't you answer the question? Did you watch it? Maybe you should STFU if you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Rick

 

[Si modo]

When did asking for proof become intimidation?

No asking, demanding. See, there is this thing called the Constitution and in it is something about search and seizures. The number four comes to mind for some reason.

Read your own link. The law maker requested.

There is nothing wrong with investigating claims by corporations to find out if they are true or not. Do a little reading. Here, some easily understood info from wikipedia.

Investigative hearings

Investigative hearings share some of the characteristics of legislative and oversight hearings. The difference lies in Congress’s stated determination to investigate, usually when there is a suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of public officials acting in their official capacity, or private citizens whose activities suggest the need for a legislative remedy. Congress’s authority to investigate is broad and it has exercised this authority since the earliest days of the republic. Its most famous inquiries are benchmarks in American history: Credit Mobilier, Teapot Dome, Army-McCarthy, Watergate, and Iran-Contra. Investigative hearings often lead to legislation to address the problems uncovered. Judicial activities in the same area of Congress’s investigation may precede, run simultaneously with, or follow such inquiries.

Subpoenas and depositions

Most individuals respond favorably to an invitation to testify, believing it to be a valuable opportunity to communicate and publicize their views on a question of public policy. However, if a person will not come by invitation alone, a committee or subcommittee may require an appearance through the issuance of a subpoena (Rule XXVI, paragraph 1). Committees also may subpoena correspondence, books, papers, and other documents. Subpoenas are issued infrequently, and most often in the course of investigative hearings.

No shit that a lawmaker is making this demand. That is the glaring point, ravi. Read your 4th Amendment. The 4th is SUPPOSED to protect us all from government going on fishing expeditions for suspected evidence of a crime, firstly. Secondly, what crime? Objecting to a bill that will seriously affect their business?

 

[California Girl]

The economy was TANKING way BEFORE Herr Bush left office, it started around mid to late '05.

People started losing jobs like crazy.

Thanks to the RW so-called "pro-business/pro-economic" policies.

You RW FOOLS!!!

Actually, it started before '05 - the predictions of a major crash were ignored for a decade. That's a fact. And it wasn't Bush - it was successive governments - from both sides. In fact (and I do mean FACT, not opinion) Bush was one of the few who actually took the predictions of economists seriously and tried to take steps to minimize the impact. He was ignored by the media and fought by congress - ummmm - that would be a Democrat congress. Just sayin'.

If you're gonna bullshit, I suggest you bullshit about stuff you either know about or that cannot be proved to be total crap. Just a suggestion.

 

[Ravi]

I wonder if the companies that will go to capital hill to cry that health care will cost them too much will arrive in their tricked out company jets and if the media will even notice.

 

[California Girl]

not to mention the fact, that if what these businesses say, is true....congress needs to know THAT, NOW....so they can try to amend the situation.

CEOs told Obama about this problem before he signed the legislation.

Having McCarthy-esque hearings after the fact when 2,000+ page legislation is passed without being read is the wrong answer. The proper process would be more open deliberation and analysis - perhaps even a requirement that the full text be read in full before both houses before a final vote takes place.

Please stop educating the lefties. It upsets them.