Reconciliation On Health Care (or anything else), How Can You Defend It?

[Care4all]

the healthcare bill in the house PASSED ALREADY with a majority and the senate did NOT use reconciliation to pass the healthcare bill, they used the filibuster, with 60 votes to pass the bill.

Care4All...you are aware that those were 2 different Bills right? and why would the Democrats "use the filibuster" to pass a Bill? This makes no sense.

pp, the senate passed their healthcare bill by meeting the 60 votes needed to bring the filibuster against it to cloture. When it was voted on, it got a super majority....this was not brought to a vote by a simple majority? The senate utilized the filibuster....they did not use reconciliation- a mere majority vote, to get this legislation passed through the Senate. IT MET the hurdle....

the house passed their bill according to the rules set as well.

the 'conference' amendments to merge the bill together is what the senate dems are bringing a 'point of order' forward, so that they can be voted on and passed with a majority vote.

btw the house does not ever need a super majority to pass amendments of a conference bill....and the house of representatives, represent us, the people.

the senate, who represents the state gvt SomeTimes needs a super majority to pass controversial legislation, and this senate used the super majority feature, the filibuster, and overcame it, to pass this legislation....

Am i happy with the result of this bill, no....i am not happy with the end result, and would vote against it, if it were up to me...

but on passing the amendments to merge the two bills that were already debated and sadly passed....i have no qualms with such, BECAUSE we have already had our congress and senate debate and pass the bills in their respective houses.

it's all over but the shoutin'.....the fat lady sang already.... se la vie

 

[Missourian]

what can I say? sometimes doing the right thing isn't popular with folks. I wonder how many white folks south of the mason-dixon line were happy with washington when they passed the civil rights act? When people see the benefits in action, they will approve of the results.

First, the Civil Rights Act was supported by the majority of Americans...only one Republican joined the Southern Democrat filibuster in the Senate.

Second, I'm afraid "Trust us, we know what's best for you" isn't going to cut the mustard.

Americans, both Democrats and Republicans are in favor of health care reform...but this bill is not the reform Americans want.

Do Congressional Democrats and President Obama think "we the people" are incapable of reaching our own intelligent decision on health care reform?

Do they believe we are so mentally deficient that they must take it upon themselves to show us the error of our ways?

Because that is exactly how this reconciliation process sounds to the American people.

"No, we don't care what you think...we know what's best for you."

Americans who polls show do not support the "bill" oddly enough support all the major provisions OF the bill. Portability... no caps on claims.... expanded coverage.... no denial for pre-existing conditions... most americans support a public option, even....but for some reason, they don't like this "bill". curious.

now be honest. Have YOU read the entire bill? I know I have not. I have read a synopsis of it provided by my congresswoman's office.... and I am a political junkie. WHat percent of those americans that claim they are "against the bill" have read even two sentences of it? or have any REAL idea about what is really contained therein? If you would be honest, I would imagine you might put that percentage somewhere at under 3% like I do.... in which case, what does it even mean?

Honestly, I have not read the entire bill and I agree that very few have...I doubt the Senators and Representatives who will be voting on it have read it all.

The bill is 2,000 pages long. And yet you managed to condense the points most agree on into one sentence.

But I am able to distill information from quality sources and form an independent opinion. I'm confident many of the Americans polled by CNN are capable of doing the same.

Here are the facts:

This bill is going to cost trillions.

It REQUIRES all Americans to purchase insurance...and not any insurance they choose but the insurance that meets the requirements of the bill (meaning less choice, not more).

It is NOT going to reduce premiums.

It ADDS hundreds of billions to the deficit.

It requires 10 year of taxes to yield 6 years of entitlements.

It add a new entitlement program to the plethora of existing entitlements that we are cannot afford to fund.

​

And before you accuse me of lying, regurgitating talking points or exaggerating the truth...my information is verified by the left leaning Factcheck.org.

• Obama promised once again that a health care overhaul “will be paid for.” But congressional budget experts say the bills they’ve seen so far would add hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade.

• He said the plan "that I put forward" would cover at least 97 percent of all Americans. Actually, the plan he campaigned on would cover far less than that, and only one of the bills now being considered in Congress would do that. (P.S.- it's not the Senate Bill)

• He said the "average American family is paying thousands" as part of their premiums to cover uncompensated care for the uninsured, implying that expanded coverage will slash insurance costs. But the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation puts the cost per family figure at $200.

• Obama claimed his budget "reduced federal spending over the next 10 years by $2.2 trillion" compared with where it was headed before. Not true. Even figures from his own budget experts don’t support that. The Congressional Budget Office projects a $2.7 trillion increase, not a $2.2 trillion cut.

Obama’s Health Care News Conference | FactCheck.org

• Sen. Lamar Alexander said premiums will go up for “millions” under the Senate bill and president’s plan, while President Barack Obama said families buying the same coverage they have now would pay much less. Both were misleading. The Congressional Budget Office said premiums for those in the group market wouldn’t change significantly, while the average premium for those who buy their own coverage would go up.

Health Care Summit Squabbles | FactCheck.org​

​

 

[maineman]

Honestly, I have not read the entire bill and I agree that very few have...I doubt the Senators and Representatives who will be voting on it have read it all.

The bill is 2,000 pages long. And yet you managed to condense the points most agree on into one sentence.

But I am able to distill information from quality sources and form an independent opinion. I'm confident many of the Americans polled by CNN are capable of doing the same.

Alas, I have no such level of confidence. I know full well that creating legislation is as unattractive as making sausage, but it will always be that way, regardless of what party is in control.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I can justify it.... aside from what care said, which is dead on right....

when a minority insists on blocking the majority for no reason but their own political gain, you have to do what you have to do.

as republicans did 22 times.

i don't recall seeing a single thread on it, though. why? because there wasn't anything wong with it then and there isn't anything wrong with it now.

The Dimocrats have had complete control of Washington for a year.

No minority blocked the health care bill.

Do you know what did?

The people who contacted their reps and voiced their opinion.

Reconciliation was meant as a budgetary tool not a legislative one. That said, it is a poor policy on any count.

 

[Old Rocks]

The "nuclear" Option, Reconciliation, a simple majority vote....whatever you want to call it how can people justify bastardizing our political system like this. Health Care reform is HUGE, its 1/6th of our economy! Its too big for these shenanigans.

I'll start this with my outrage at the tactic and I want people who support it to go ahead and defend it. I want a debate on this.

This is not a debate on a need for healthcare or the actual bill itself, it is a debate on using Reconciliation.


A short recommended read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconciliation_(United_States_Congress)

How the fuck can you defend drivel like this? You people did the same thing in ramming through Bush's insane tax cuts during a war in 2003.

In fact, the Republicans have used exactly this procedure 14 times since 1980, the Democrats, 8 times. So I think that we can justify using it at least 6 times in the near future.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The "nuclear" Option, Reconciliation, a simple majority vote....whatever you want to call it how can people justify bastardizing our political system like this. Health Care reform is HUGE, its 1/6th of our economy! Its too big for these shenanigans.

I'll start this with my outrage at the tactic and I want people who support it to go ahead and defend it. I want a debate on this.

This is not a debate on a need for healthcare or the actual bill itself, it is a debate on using Reconciliation.


A short recommended read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconciliation_(United_States_Congress)

How the fuck can you defend drivel like this? You people did the same thing in ramming through Bush's insane tax cuts during a war in 2003.

In fact, the Republicans have used exactly this procedure 14 times since 1980, the Democrats, 8 times. So I think that we can justify using it at least 6 times in the near future.

Whether or not you agree with the tax cuts, reconciliation in that case was used as it was meant to be used and that was for budgetary purposes.

Reconciliation was never meant to be a legislative tool.

 

[Old Rocks]

So you say. The filibuster rule is not in the Constitution, nor is the reconcilliation rules.

 

[Skull Pilot]

So you say. The filibuster rule is not in the Constitution, nor is the reconcilliation rules.

Reconciliation came to be as part of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974

Look it up.

 

[DiamondDave]

First, the Civil Rights Act was supported by the majority of Americans...only one Republican joined the Southern Democrat filibuster in the Senate.

Second, I'm afraid "Trust us, we know what's best for you" isn't going to cut the mustard.

Americans, both Democrats and Republicans are in favor of health care reform...but this bill is not the reform Americans want.

Do Congressional Democrats and President Obama think "we the people" are incapable of reaching our own intelligent decision on health care reform?

Do they believe we are so mentally deficient that they must take it upon themselves to show us the error of our ways?

Because that is exactly how this reconciliation process sounds to the American people.

"No, we don't care what you think...we know what's best for you."

Americans who polls show do not support the "bill" oddly enough support all the major provisions OF the bill. Portability... no caps on claims.... expanded coverage.... no denial for pre-existing conditions... most americans support a public option, even....but for some reason, they don't like this "bill". curious.

now be honest. Have YOU read the entire bill? I know I have not. I have read a synopsis of it provided by my congresswoman's office.... and I am a political junkie. WHat percent of those americans that claim they are "against the bill" have read even two sentences of it? or have any REAL idea about what is really contained therein? If you would be honest, I would imagine you might put that percentage somewhere at under 3% like I do.... in which case, what does it even mean?

Honestly, I have not read the entire bill and I agree that very few have...I doubt the Senators and Representatives who will be voting on it have read it all.

The bill is 2,000 pages long. And yet you managed to condense the points most agree on into one sentence.

But I am able to distill information from quality sources and form an independent opinion. I'm confident many of the Americans polled by CNN are capable of doing the same.

Here are the facts:

This bill is going to cost trillions.

It REQUIRES all Americans to purchase insurance...and not any insurance they choose but the insurance that meets the requirements of the bill (meaning less choice, not more).

It is NOT going to reduce premiums.

It ADDS hundreds of billions to the deficit.

It requires 10 year of taxes to yield 6 years of entitlements.

It add a new entitlement program to the plethora of existing entitlements that we are cannot afford to fund.

​

And before you accuse me of lying, regurgitating talking points or exaggerating the truth...my information is verified by the left leaning Factcheck.org.

• Obama promised once again that a health care overhaul “will be paid for.” But congressional budget experts say the bills they’ve seen so far would add hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade.

• He said the plan "that I put forward" would cover at least 97 percent of all Americans. Actually, the plan he campaigned on would cover far less than that, and only one of the bills now being considered in Congress would do that. (P.S.- it's not the Senate Bill)

• He said the "average American family is paying thousands" as part of their premiums to cover uncompensated care for the uninsured, implying that expanded coverage will slash insurance costs. But the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation puts the cost per family figure at $200.

• Obama claimed his budget "reduced federal spending over the next 10 years by $2.2 trillion" compared with where it was headed before. Not true. Even figures from his own budget experts don’t support that. The Congressional Budget Office projects a $2.7 trillion increase, not a $2.2 trillion cut.

Obama’s Health Care News Conference | FactCheck.org

• Sen. Lamar Alexander said premiums will go up for “millions” under the Senate bill and president’s plan, while President Barack Obama said families buying the same coverage they have now would pay much less. Both were misleading. The Congressional Budget Office said premiums for those in the group market wouldn’t change significantly, while the average premium for those who buy their own coverage would go up.

Health Care Summit Squabbles | FactCheck.org​

​

Not to worry Missou.... even though you spell it out for them... the blinded, Obama dick sucking, wingers will go right back to spouting the same slogans, the same lies, and the same ridiculous mantra

 

[California Girl]

The "nuclear" Option, Reconciliation, a simple majority vote....whatever you want to call it how can people justify bastardizing our political system like this. Health Care reform is HUGE, its 1/6th of our economy! Its too big for these shenanigans.

I'll start this with my outrage at the tactic and I want people who support it to go ahead and defend it. I want a debate on this.

This is not a debate on a need for healthcare or the actual bill itself, it is a debate on using Reconciliation.


A short recommended read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconciliation_(United_States_Congress)

How the fuck can you defend drivel like this? You people did the same thing in ramming through Bush's insane tax cuts during a war in 2003.

In fact, the Republicans have used exactly this procedure 14 times since 1980, the Democrats, 8 times. So I think that we can justify using it at least 6 times in the near future.

So, according to you, two wrongs now equal a right?

What a fucking stupid argument.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I can justify it.... aside from what care said, which is dead on right....

when a minority insists on blocking the majority for no reason but their own political gain, you have to do what you have to do.

as republicans did 22 times.

i don't recall seeing a single thread on it, though. why? because there wasn't anything wong with it then and there isn't anything wrong with it now.

So Bush could have privatized SocSecurity, reformed Freddie and Fannie, passed English as official language and a national voter ID with a simple majority, thanks, we're going to remember that when we have a simple majority again.