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

[Oldandtired]

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)

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Currently, there is not a single US citizen that does not have a guaranteed access to healthcare.

 

[Wry Catcher]

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)

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Well Yank, I'm always willing to read and consider the argument of others, do you think any of those dancing to the Henny Penny Polka would be willilng to take a break and actually explain what the founders meant by "provide the general welfare"; I'm always willing to listen to rational argument, sans emotion.

 

[Claudette]

Good, simple explanation Van.

A good majority of Americans are not in favor of this bill. I wonder if the Dems will be willing to walk the plank for Pelosi and OL'BO to pass this bill??

Thats the big question.

That is not true cluadette

What the overwhelming majority of americans, including myself, are in favor of is health care reform. However the majority of americans do not favor this specific bill.

Care4All and I disagree on some of the types of reform needed but we both agree reform is needed and this bill isn't good.

I thought thats what I said Plym. "A good majority of Americans are not in favor of this bill". YOur right. This bill isn't good at all.

I, like you and many others, want reform. Not this giant clusterfuck they are trying to shove down our throats.

Fix whats wrong. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[maineman]

Good, simple explanation Van.

A good majority of Americans are not in favor of this bill. I wonder if the Dems will be willing to walk the plank for Pelosi and OL'BO to pass this bill??

Thats the big question.

That is not true cluadette

What the overwhelming majority of americans, including myself, are in favor of is health care reform. However the majority of americans do not favor this specific bill.

Care4All and I disagree on some of the types of reform needed but we both agree reform is needed and this bill isn't good.

I thought thats what I said Plym. "A good majority of Americans are not in favor of this bill". YOur right. This bill isn't good at all.

I, like you and many others, want reform. Not this giant clusterfuck they are trying to shove down our throats.

Fix whats wrong. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

have you read the bill? what "baby" is being thrown out by this measure?

 

[VaYank5150]

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Currently, there is not a single US citizen that does not have a guaranteed access to healthcare.

You are referring to emergency care. Emergency care does nothing to "promote the general welfare" and you are old enough to know better.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So "General Welfare" now means everybody gets welfare?

 

[Oldandtired]

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Well Yank, I'm always willing to read and consider the argument of others, do you think any of those dancing to the Henny Penny Polka would be willilng to take a break and actually explain what the founders meant by "provide the general welfare"; I'm always willing to listen to rational argument, sans emotion.

Tp provide services the individual can not provide for oneself.
For example...rich or poor, an individual can not protect himself from a foreign invasion.
Rich or poor, one can not provide well built roads and infrastrcuture.
Anyone has the ability to provide themselves with healthcare...it is an individual right and an individual ability....
And here in the US if they can not afford to, they get it anyway.

 

[boedicca]

You are referring to emergency care. Emergency care does nothing to "promote the general welfare" and you are old enough to know better.

You are assuming that everything we do is directed and mandated by the government.

Doctors take professional oaths to provide care to those who need it. Many do pro bono work without being ordered to by the government.

Believe it or not, some of us follow higher standards in our private actions than the minimums set by government regulators.

 

[Wry Catcher]

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Currently, there is not a single US citizen that does not have a guaranteed access to healthcare.

Really? Gee, what a surprise. You mean all those people who show up at emergency rooms could simply have gone to any doctor with an appointment, and not waited through triage for hours? OMG, are they stupid. BTW, who pays for the emergency treatment, when this guarantee of health is provided to the uninsured?
And I wonder, what if (hypothetical) Joe Poor contracts a communicable disease (say TB) and untreated rides the bus or subway, waits in line at McDonalds or Macy's or sends their children to school?
Seems to me someone should look out for the general welfare of all Americans, and provide a common defense for all Americans from disease.

 

[Oldandtired]

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Currently, there is not a single US citizen that does not have a guaranteed access to healthcare.

You are referring to emergency care. Emergency care does nothing to "promote the general welfare" and you are old enough to know better.

I am not referring to emergency care.
For example.....
If one needs a H1N1 shot, they can get it at no cost

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Good, simple explanation Van.

A good majority of Americans are not in favor of this bill. I wonder if the Dems will be willing to walk the plank for Pelosi and OL'BO to pass this bill??

Thats the big question.

That is not true cluadette

What the overwhelming majority of americans, including myself, are in favor of is health care reform. However the majority of americans do not favor this specific bill.

Care4All and I disagree on some of the types of reform needed but we both agree reform is needed and this bill isn't good.

I thought thats what I said Plym. "A good majority of Americans are not in favor of this bill". YOur right. This bill isn't good at all.

I, like you and many others, want reform. Not this giant clusterfuck they are trying to shove down our throats.

Fix whats wrong. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

you did say that I TOTALLY misread what you posted.

My bad

 

[VaYank5150]

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Well Yank, I'm always willing to read and consider the argument of others, do you think any of those dancing to the Henny Penny Polka would be willilng to take a break and actually explain what the founders meant by "provide the general welfare"; I'm always willing to listen to rational argument, sans emotion.

No, they won't. However, they will be MORE THAN happy to tell you their interpretation of "provide for the common defence". I had NO idea how far they would take the old "the best defense is a good offense" crap...

 

[Oldandtired]

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Currently, there is not a single US citizen that does not have a guaranteed access to healthcare.

Really? Gee, what a surprise. You mean all those people who show up at emergency rooms could simply have gone to any doctor with an appointment, and not waited through triage for hours? OMG, are they stupid. BTW, who pays for the emergency treatment, when this guarantee of health is provided to the uninsured?
And I wonder, what if (hypothetical) Joe Poor contracts a communicable disease (say TB) and untreated rides the bus or subway, waits in line at McDonalds or Macy's or sends their children to school?
Seems to me someone should look out for the general welfare of all Americans, and provide a common defense for all Americans from disease.

Oh...I see....

So it is no longer healthcare we are talking about.

It is CONVENIENCE we are talking about.

Sorry....general welfare does not refer to convenience.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

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)

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

So how does that back up overlooking the senate rule of needing a 3/5's majority to shut down debate on new laws in regard to health care?

 

[maineman]

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)

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

So how does that back up overlooking the senate rule of needing a 3/5's majority to shut down debate on new laws in regard to health care?

again...please show me where the constitution of the united states requires that the sentate needs 3/5's to shut down debate. Senate rules are written by senators and can - and have been - changed at the beginning of each term. Why do you refuse to acknowledge that?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Well Yank, I'm always willing to read and consider the argument of others, do you think any of those dancing to the Henny Penny Polka would be willilng to take a break and actually explain what the founders meant by "provide the general welfare"; I'm always willing to listen to rational argument, sans emotion.

No explanation needed its right there in the language.

PROVIDE for the common defense
PROMOTE the general welfare

They differentiated rigth there. One must be provided, the other must be encouraged (promote is not the same as provide)

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Currently, there is not a single US citizen that does not have a guaranteed access to healthcare.

Really? Gee, what a surprise. You mean all those people who show up at emergency rooms could simply have gone to any doctor with an appointment, and not waited through triage for hours? OMG, are they stupid. BTW, who pays for the emergency treatment, when this guarantee of health is provided to the uninsured?
And I wonder, what if (hypothetical) Joe Poor contracts a communicable disease (say TB) and untreated rides the bus or subway, waits in line at McDonalds or Macy's or sends their children to school?
Seems to me someone should look out for the general welfare of all Americans, and provide a common defense for all Americans from disease.

Once again you assume that there are 31 million people who cannot afford health insurance....this ASSUMPTION on your part is quite disingenuous.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Well Yank, I'm always willing to read and consider the argument of others, do you think any of those dancing to the Henny Penny Polka would be willilng to take a break and actually explain what the founders meant by "provide the general welfare"; I'm always willing to listen to rational argument, sans emotion.

No explanation needed its right there in the language.

PROVIDE for the common defense
PROMOTE the general welfare

They differentiated rigth there. One must be provided, the other must be encouraged (promote is not the same as provide)

BRAVO!!!! There is someone besides myself who can read!!!!!!

 

[maineman]

Are you mad? Are you trying to IMPLY that "promote the general welfare" has ANYTHING to do with ensuring US citizens have access to healthcare? Are you a Socialist or something?

Well Yank, I'm always willing to read and consider the argument of others, do you think any of those dancing to the Henny Penny Polka would be willilng to take a break and actually explain what the founders meant by "provide the general welfare"; I'm always willing to listen to rational argument, sans emotion.

No explanation needed its right there in the language.

PROVIDE for the common defense
PROMOTE the general welfare

They differentiated rigth there. One must be provided, the other must be encouraged (promote is not the same as provide)

are you suggesting that providing some baseline level of marginal support is NOT promoting general welfare? Are you suggesting that some small degree of provision is precluded by language from the various tactics that might be employed to promote such welfare?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

A very short required read: The Vision Statement for Governance.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

So how does that back up overlooking the senate rule of needing a 3/5's majority to shut down debate on new laws in regard to health care?

again...please show me where the constitution of the united states requires that the sentate needs 3/5's to shut down debate. Senate rules are written by senators and can - and have been - changed at the beginning of each term. Why do you refuse to acknowledge that?

Go back to my response the first time you asked that. I provided you a link with that information.

I never said it was unamerican. I called it a bastardization of our political system. In our system you need 3/5 of a vote to pass a law, not 51/100.

show me a link to anything in our constitution where it says that you need 3/5 of a vote to pass a law.

I think you missed civics class pilgrim.

In order to end debate, vote on and pass the bill, and invoke cloture they need a 3/5ths vote. Its how it works. read up on the senate rules.

They can't just "shut down debate" by invoking reconciliation/nuke option/simple majority. Its how the system works

Here is a good read for you Project Vote Smart - GOVERNMENT 101: How a Bill Becomes Law