Healthcare Bill Hit Parade!!

[Navy1960]

2) includes a mechanism, such as a regional
11 medical direction or transport communications sys12
tem, that operates throughout the region to ensure
13 that the patient is taken to the medically appro14
priate facility (whether an initial facility or a higher15
level facility) in a timely fashion;

Would someone please tell what business the Federal Govt. has or empowered by the constitution to dictate where a patient is taken and treated?

 

[Political Junky]

You have not "proven" anything. I read the exchange with Care, and it is a matter of interpretation, and you are wrong. Go to the 14-page analysis by CBO, below, specifically the last paragraph of Page 4. Throughout the analysis, it refers to LEGAL residents.

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/House_Tri-Committee.pdf

Huffington post...chuckle....

Hey, stupid, the link is to the PDF version of the CBO letter. Try sprinkling the top of your head; maybe half of the gray matter will start to move around inside.

There's no reviving any traces of grey matter there.

 

[jreeves]

Huffington post...chuckle....

Hey, stupid, the link is to the PDF version of the CBO letter. Try sprinkling the top of your head; maybe half of the gray matter will start to move around inside.

There's no reviving any traces of grey matter there.

This coming from a 'junky' who wants to turn their health care over to a government that has nothing but near bankrupt programs to show as a track record.

 

[Navy1960]

I find it somewhat troubling that a thread that's intent is to cite the issues related to the ACTUAL legislation before congress would cause people to become upset over it. In fact if the actualy legislation is not matching the talk comming from those that you support no matter what side of the debate that is, then you should be upset about that. However, this thread is a thread to discuss the actual legislation and not the marketing talk associated with it.

 

[MaggieMae]

BTW aren't you the one who said this?
Yeah, I always go to YouTube or Twitter for my facts. I'd much rather my information come from more reliable, less partisan, sources.

Your point? I get my information from a huge variety of sources, not the least of which is Congressional Daily, which is straight reporting. I watch/listen on average 15 hours per week of C-Span and also read THEIR links to sources. You will ever win an argument with me by just parroting opinions of others, so don't even try. On the other hand, if you're ever 'right' about something, I'll let you know.

In what way did you not parrot the blogger that has blogged for DailyKOS as well as other liberal websites?

I've never visited DailyKOS in my life. The only thing I've EVER read which was posted by them was that Patreaus-Betrayus stuff in 2007. I also don't read Huffington Post on a regular basis, but they are an excellent site for hyperlinking items in PDF form if one doesn't know the exact wording. You can take a guess and often Google will direct me to the HP, which then has a redirect. [Hope Navy sees this as well.]

My opinions are my own, based on analyzing a variety of publications, etc. As for health care, yes, I believe government intervention IS needed, but no, I don't believe that cost containment has been fully explored. So I'm right in the middle, just like two-thirds of the rest of Americans on this. Mine isn't a left or right position based on any one leftist website or talking head.

I have a real problem, however, with the continued yammering from the ideological point of view: SOCIALISM!!! EGADS!!! Done correctly, any government-sponsored health care program does NOT mean the beginning of an era of Stalin-esque Socialism/Communism, or even a carbon copy of the British system.

I was amused listening to C-Span's Washington Journal this morning, once again dealing with the health care issue, only this time the moderator asked a specific question of the callers: How do you currently pay for your health care? The hommina hommina hommina comments from some of the Republican callers preceded the fact that, um, I get mine through Medicare/Medicaid. Surprise surprise. Yet they're against coverage for those who don't qualify for either because it will lead to Socialism? Interesting.

 

[MaggieMae]

I find it somewhat troubling that a thread that's intent is to cite the issues related to the ACTUAL legislation before congress would cause people to become upset over it. In fact if the actualy legislation is not matching the talk comming from those that you support no matter what side of the debate that is, then you should be upset about that. However, this thread is a thread to discuss the actual legislation and not the marketing talk associated with it.

We have no control over what has already been written. Everything out there, on the table today, continues to be marked up anyway. So what you cite may have already been changed or removed. That's MY problem with your attempt at dissecting every paragraph of the House bill. The real meat of anything won't happen until both chambers merge their final drafts and it then goes to conference. And trust me, no matter how hard Obama is pushing to get this done in two weeks, the legislators, even Democrats, WANT the month of August to hold town meetings, read their e-mails from their constituents, and get a genuine feel for how the public is reacting.

 

[MaggieMae]

2) includes a mechanism, such as a regional
11 medical direction or transport communications sys12
tem, that operates throughout the region to ensure
13 that the patient is taken to the medically appro14
priate facility (whether an initial facility or a higher15
level facility) in a timely fashion;

Would someone please tell what business the Federal Govt. has or empowered by the constitution to dictate where a patient is taken and treated?

Now you're just being silly. If I've been badly burned, I would prefer to be flown to a burn center, not some community clinic nearby. If I've sustained a broken arm in a car crash, a community clinic nearby could render the same care as the Mayor Clinic.

You're treating some of these subparagraphs as though a person needing medical care would first need to ring up someone at the White House for approval before the choice is made. Please...

 

[Maple]

bill, it will signal an end to private insurance carriers. Everyone will end up on the national plan.

Thank you for reading this, I will when I have time. Too bad, that our elected officials won't read it before they sign on, just like they did the Stimulus bill that is not working.

 

[MaggieMae]

bill, it will signal an end to private insurance carriers. Everyone will end up on the national plan.

Thank you for reading this, I will when I have time. Too bad, that our elected officials won't read it before they sign on, just like they did the Stimulus bill that is not working.

The difference is that hundreds of hours and thousands of pages of markups have been done on the health care issue, whereas the Stimulus Bill was passed as "emergency" legislation.

You can project all you want about what "might be," but that's all it is: Guesswork. With this much antagonism over just an attempt to get everyone INSURED, I wouldn't lose any sleep over the U.S. devising national health CARE before you meet your maker and it won't matter anyway.

I also don't worry too much about private insurers going out of business. They have been part of the profitmaking landscape for way too many years not to know how to game the system. These guys are pros.

 

[Care4all]

2) includes a mechanism, such as a regional
11 medical direction or transport communications sys12
tem, that operates throughout the region to ensure
13 that the patient is taken to the medically appro14
priate facility (whether an initial facility or a higher15
level facility) in a timely fashion;

Would someone please tell what business the Federal Govt. has or empowered by the constitution to dictate where a patient is taken and treated?

good morning Navy!
sounds like a patient bill of rights issue...

sometimes your insurance determines which hospital you can use and be covered by them...perhaps this?

Also, in larger populated areas, there are separate hospitals that handle different types of emergencies....trauma center for extensive trauma....hospitals with larger labor and delivery centers, hospitals which specialize in newborn intensive care etc....

ambulances were taking patients to the hospital they were associated with, verses who had the best care for the emergency....

sounds to me like the EMT'S will call in symptoms and doctors on call or a protocol, will send the patient in the right direction depending on the circumstance....

 

[Navy1960]

Good Morning to you too Care

I suppose it boils down to the issue of your Govt. dictating to you the type of care and where you should get that care. If you have no problems with that then it does not suprise me that the next step from that would be to advocate Govt. mandated healthcare. I personally do not believe the Govt. has the power to dictate what type of care you should receive. This should be a local matter and a matter based on the assesment of the care providers on scene. Maggie, again I'm sorry if the contents of the bill upset you as opposed to what you have been told, but I believe you are beginning to see why a lot of democrats on the hill are balking at this now. I will restate what I have said many times on here, these ARE the bills that are being debated in the house and senate and I AM going to keep pointing out what the issues are within the bills that effect everyone. The one thing about this healthcare debate that seperates people the most is this, most believe that healthcare costs should be brought down, however a lot of people do not want a Govt. to FORCE everyone into a healthcare program that they have not chosen for themselves. While this may not be a big deal with some, it a very big deal for me as my Govt. is not empowered under the law take that choice from me.

“No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.” –Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, 1816. ME 15:24

What I find as truley disturbing here is the willingness of so many to strip their fellow citizens of their rights for their own. So while you wish to have cheap healthcare I submit respectfully that anyone who supports this sort of effort contained in both these bills does so because they have a short sighted vision on healthcare and support those who really do not wish to solve the real issues that effect costs.

 

[sealybobo]

Good Morning to you too Care

I suppose it boils down to the issue of your Govt. dictating to you the type of care and where you should get that care. If you have no problems with that then it does not suprise me that the next step from that would be to advocate Govt. mandated healthcare. I personally do not believe the Govt. has the power to dictate what type of care you should receive. This should be a local matter and a matter based on the assesment of the care providers on scene. Maggie, again I'm sorry if the contents of the bill upset you as opposed to what you have been told, but I believe you are beginning to see why a lot of democrats on the hill are balking at this now. I will restate what I have said many times on here, these ARE the bills that are being debated in the house and senate and I AM going to keep pointing out what the issues are within the bills that effect everyone. The one thing about this healthcare debate that seperates people the most is this, most believe that healthcare costs should be brought down, however a lot of people do not want a Govt. to FORCE everyone into a healthcare program that they have not chosen for themselves. While this may not be a big deal with some, it a very big deal for me as my Govt. is not empowered under the law take that choice from me.

You know Canada started their system province by province, not nationwide all at once.

It has nothing to do with stripping rights. Its about giving people the right to healthcare, and not allowing the corporations to rip off the public. Certain things we need Navy. We need gas, so our government doesn't allow the oil companies to gouge us. We need electricities, so the government regulates that industry. Actually, Cheney let them regulate themselves but we see where that got us.

Well we need healthcare, and the insurance companies are ripping us off too. Oh we know you want to let the free markets decide, but we can't afford that anymore. And they are all in collusion with each other. Time to break up the monopoly. They have too much power/control. Jefferson also warned about corporations and rich people becoming too powerful but you ignore those warnings.

We tried your way. It didn't work. And I know you don't think we didn't try hard or long enough, but we won the election. We have 60 filabuster senate seats.

All you have is the corporate media, the lobbyists, the GOP and about 15 sellout Democrats on your side. So relax, you'll win.

And stop trying to spin why those Democrats are balking on this bill. Do you think we are stupid? Look at how much each of them has taken from the healthcare lobby. Either you think we are stupid or you aren't the brightest tool in the shed.

 

[Navy1960]

bill, it will signal an end to private insurance carriers. Everyone will end up on the national plan.

Thank you for reading this, I will when I have time. Too bad, that our elected officials won't read it before they sign on, just like they did the Stimulus bill that is not working.

Your most likely right on the health insurance issue, it does seem to point in the direction of taking people down the path towards Govt. healthcare. I do feel however that what it will lead to will be a healthcare system that is supports low quality healthcare for a vast majority of Americans and for those that can really afford it, they will be able to purchase high quality care seperate from the system. The end will result will be right back where we started except with a massive deficit.

 

[MaggieMae]

Good Morning to you too Care

I suppose it boils down to the issue of your Govt. dictating to you the type of care and where you should get that care. If you have no problems with that then it does not suprise me that the next step from that would be to advocate Govt. mandated healthcare. I personally do not believe the Govt. has the power to dictate what type of care you should receive. This should be a local matter and a matter based on the assesment of the care providers on scene. Maggie, again I'm sorry if the contents of the bill upset you as opposed to what you have been told, but I believe you are beginning to see why a lot of democrats on the hill are balking at this now. I will restate what I have said many times on here, these ARE the bills that are being debated in the house and senate and I AM going to keep pointing out what the issues are within the bills that effect everyone. The one thing about this healthcare debate that seperates people the most is this, most believe that healthcare costs should be brought down, however a lot of people do not want a Govt. to FORCE everyone into a healthcare program that they have not chosen for themselves. While this may not be a big deal with some, it a very big deal for me as my Govt. is not empowered under the law take that choice from me.

“No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.” –Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, 1816. ME 15:24

What I find as truley disturbing here is the willingness of so many to strip their fellow citizens of their rights for their own. So while you wish to have cheap healthcare I submit respectfully that anyone who supports this sort of effort contained in both these bills does so because they have a short sighted vision on healthcare and support those who really do not wish to solve the real issues that effect costs.

You are simply NOT paying attention, sir. Here is Chuck Grassley with an update as of about 1:30pm today discussing the COMPROMISE Senate Finance bill, which is the ONLY policy bill that will be considered. He discusses the demise of the House bill that you painstakingly read and posted for review, as well as the Kennedy bill of several weeks ago. The Senate Finance Committee went into closed session just a few moments ago and will work on the balance of cost containment through the evening. Grassley says on this tape that they still need to close the gap on about $200 billion, and then they will have a deal.

msnbc.com Video Player

 

[Navy1960]

Good Morning to you too Care

I suppose it boils down to the issue of your Govt. dictating to you the type of care and where you should get that care. If you have no problems with that then it does not suprise me that the next step from that would be to advocate Govt. mandated healthcare. I personally do not believe the Govt. has the power to dictate what type of care you should receive. This should be a local matter and a matter based on the assesment of the care providers on scene. Maggie, again I'm sorry if the contents of the bill upset you as opposed to what you have been told, but I believe you are beginning to see why a lot of democrats on the hill are balking at this now. I will restate what I have said many times on here, these ARE the bills that are being debated in the house and senate and I AM going to keep pointing out what the issues are within the bills that effect everyone. The one thing about this healthcare debate that seperates people the most is this, most believe that healthcare costs should be brought down, however a lot of people do not want a Govt. to FORCE everyone into a healthcare program that they have not chosen for themselves. While this may not be a big deal with some, it a very big deal for me as my Govt. is not empowered under the law take that choice from me.

You know Canada started their system province by province, not nationwide all at once.

It has nothing to do with stripping rights. Its about giving people the right to healthcare, and not allowing the corporations to rip off the public. Certain things we need Navy. We need gas, so our government doesn't allow the oil companies to gouge us. We need electricities, so the government regulates that industry. Actually, Cheney let them regulate themselves but we see where that got us.

Well we need healthcare, and the insurance companies are ripping us off too. Oh we know you want to let the free markets decide, but we can't afford that anymore. And they are all in collusion with each other. Time to break up the monopoly. They have too much power/control. Jefferson also warned about corporations and rich people becoming too powerful but you ignore those warnings.

We tried your way. It didn't work. And I know you don't think we didn't try hard or long enough, but we won the election. We have 60 filabuster senate seats.

All you have is the corporate media, the lobbyists, the GOP and about 15 sellout Democrats on your side. So relax, you'll win.

And stop trying to spin why those Democrats are balking on this bill. Do you think we are stupid? Look at how much each of them has taken from the healthcare lobby. Either you think we are stupid or you aren't the brightest tool in the shed.

actually sealy I have a lot of admiration for anyone who wish to really want to address the real issues that effect the costs of healthcare and bring them down and make it more accessable for those that want it. Those that do have my full support, however those operate under the mistaken impression that healthcare is a "right" that somehow they are entitled to under the law and then wish to legislate that right I will oppose. Why you ask, because it's really simple, because it does not address the costs, and our government is not empowered under the constitution to provide healthcare for all it's citizens. I have said it many times and will continue to say it, if you wish this to be a right then I suggest you and others advocate a constitutional Amendment that would support your position. If it becomes ratified by 2/3rds of the states which I suspect it wouldn't then you would have no issues with me other than perhaps the fact it would never addresss the real issues that effect the costs of healthcare. What I find interesting in all these debates is that no one ever wishes to discuss these things, but rather they wish to talk about what the evil insurance companies have done to them. When democrats are willing to discuss what causes healthcare costs to rise and actually do something to fix it rather than violate the law by mandating coverage for all then I'm willing to support that.

 

[MaggieMae]

What I find as truley disturbing here is the willingness of so many to strip their fellow citizens of their rights for their own. So while you wish to have cheap healthcare I submit respectfully that anyone who supports this sort of effort contained in both these bills does so because they have a short sighted vision on healthcare and support those who really do not wish to solve the real issues that effect costs.

You are the one who is in the minority as far as your thinking. Although practically no one wants health care reform to reach trillions in cost, I have yet to see a poll anywhere which points to a majority of people not wanting and expecting to share some of the burden of health care costs for those who cannot afford more steady increases in costs offered by the free market.

While you may cherry pick obscure quotations, your own extreme ideological projections of "stripping people of their rights" is a mentality of 50-year old uber capitalistic Ayn Randism, hardly based on Jeffersonian people-first ideology.

 

[Navy1960]

Good Morning to you too Care

I suppose it boils down to the issue of your Govt. dictating to you the type of care and where you should get that care. If you have no problems with that then it does not suprise me that the next step from that would be to advocate Govt. mandated healthcare. I personally do not believe the Govt. has the power to dictate what type of care you should receive. This should be a local matter and a matter based on the assesment of the care providers on scene. Maggie, again I'm sorry if the contents of the bill upset you as opposed to what you have been told, but I believe you are beginning to see why a lot of democrats on the hill are balking at this now. I will restate what I have said many times on here, these ARE the bills that are being debated in the house and senate and I AM going to keep pointing out what the issues are within the bills that effect everyone. The one thing about this healthcare debate that seperates people the most is this, most believe that healthcare costs should be brought down, however a lot of people do not want a Govt. to FORCE everyone into a healthcare program that they have not chosen for themselves. While this may not be a big deal with some, it a very big deal for me as my Govt. is not empowered under the law take that choice from me.

“No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.” –Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, 1816. ME 15:24

What I find as truley disturbing here is the willingness of so many to strip their fellow citizens of their rights for their own. So while you wish to have cheap healthcare I submit respectfully that anyone who supports this sort of effort contained in both these bills does so because they have a short sighted vision on healthcare and support those who really do not wish to solve the real issues that effect costs.

You are simply NOT paying attention, sir. Here is Chuck Grassley with an update as of about 1:30pm today discussing the COMPROMISE Senate Finance bill, which is the ONLY policy bill that will be considered. He discusses the demise of the House bill that you painstakingly read and posted for review, as well as the Kennedy bill of several weeks ago. The Senate Finance Committee went into closed session just a few moments ago and will work on the balance of cost containment through the evening. Grassley says on this tape that they still need to close the gap on about $200 billion, and then they will have a deal.

msnbc.com Video Player

Maggie, what you don't seem to grasp, is I'm not posting from the Kennedy bill, I'm posting from the working copy that Grassley's committee is working from. Further, i'm also posting from the house version that Waxman's committee is working from and the same one that Pelosi is supporting as the house version Again, I will restate my position, if the contents of these bills scare you then good, they should scare you. The only way this bill has a chance is if the public option is eliminated but that's an observation based on the hearings and from the comments made from both sides.

 

[MaggieMae]

Good Morning to you too Care

I suppose it boils down to the issue of your Govt. dictating to you the type of care and where you should get that care. If you have no problems with that then it does not suprise me that the next step from that would be to advocate Govt. mandated healthcare. I personally do not believe the Govt. has the power to dictate what type of care you should receive. This should be a local matter and a matter based on the assesment of the care providers on scene. Maggie, again I'm sorry if the contents of the bill upset you as opposed to what you have been told, but I believe you are beginning to see why a lot of democrats on the hill are balking at this now. I will restate what I have said many times on here, these ARE the bills that are being debated in the house and senate and I AM going to keep pointing out what the issues are within the bills that effect everyone. The one thing about this healthcare debate that seperates people the most is this, most believe that healthcare costs should be brought down, however a lot of people do not want a Govt. to FORCE everyone into a healthcare program that they have not chosen for themselves. While this may not be a big deal with some, it a very big deal for me as my Govt. is not empowered under the law take that choice from me.

You know Canada started their system province by province, not nationwide all at once.

It has nothing to do with stripping rights. Its about giving people the right to healthcare, and not allowing the corporations to rip off the public. Certain things we need Navy. We need gas, so our government doesn't allow the oil companies to gouge us. We need electricities, so the government regulates that industry. Actually, Cheney let them regulate themselves but we see where that got us.

Well we need healthcare, and the insurance companies are ripping us off too. Oh we know you want to let the free markets decide, but we can't afford that anymore. And they are all in collusion with each other. Time to break up the monopoly. They have too much power/control. Jefferson also warned about corporations and rich people becoming too powerful but you ignore those warnings.

We tried your way. It didn't work. And I know you don't think we didn't try hard or long enough, but we won the election. We have 60 filabuster senate seats.

All you have is the corporate media, the lobbyists, the GOP and about 15 sellout Democrats on your side. So relax, you'll win.

And stop trying to spin why those Democrats are balking on this bill. Do you think we are stupid? Look at how much each of them has taken from the healthcare lobby. Either you think we are stupid or you aren't the brightest tool in the shed.

actually sealy I have a lot of admiration for anyone who wish to really want to address the real issues that effect the costs of healthcare and bring them down and make it more accessable for those that want it. Those that do have my full support, however those operate under the mistaken impression that healthcare is a "right" that somehow they are entitled to under the law and then wish to legislate that right I will oppose. Why you ask, because it's really simple, because it does not address the costs, and our government is not empowered under the constitution to provide healthcare for all it's citizens. I have said it many times and will continue to say it, if you wish this to be a right then I suggest you and others advocate a constitutional Amendment that would support your position. If it becomes ratified by 2/3rds of the states which I suspect it wouldn't then you would have no issues with me other than perhaps the fact it would never addresss the real issues that effect the costs of healthcare. What I find interesting in all these debates is that no one ever wishes to discuss these things, but rather they wish to talk about what the evil insurance companies have done to them. When democrats are willing to discuss what causes healthcare costs to rise and actually do something to fix it rather than violate the law by mandating coverage for all then I'm willing to support that.

Wonderful. Where were people like you for the past 40 years?

Frankly, I'm beginning to get frustrated discussing public health care with you, since being an ex-Navy guy, you no doubt have had government supplied and government funded health care yourself for many years. So I wonder how it's possible for you to even grasp what it is like for someone in dire need to have nowhere to go for treatment for a serious illness except a free clinic where the staff are either way underpaid or volunteers.

 

[Political Junky]

MSNBC has a recording of crickets that they play when a person has no answer within 30 seconds. They just played the cricket sound for a republican strategist, after he was asked what the republican plan for healthcare was ... loved it. He never did come up with anything even after that embarrassment.

 

[MaggieMae]

Good Morning to you too Care

I suppose it boils down to the issue of your Govt. dictating to you the type of care and where you should get that care. If you have no problems with that then it does not suprise me that the next step from that would be to advocate Govt. mandated healthcare. I personally do not believe the Govt. has the power to dictate what type of care you should receive. This should be a local matter and a matter based on the assesment of the care providers on scene. Maggie, again I'm sorry if the contents of the bill upset you as opposed to what you have been told, but I believe you are beginning to see why a lot of democrats on the hill are balking at this now. I will restate what I have said many times on here, these ARE the bills that are being debated in the house and senate and I AM going to keep pointing out what the issues are within the bills that effect everyone. The one thing about this healthcare debate that seperates people the most is this, most believe that healthcare costs should be brought down, however a lot of people do not want a Govt. to FORCE everyone into a healthcare program that they have not chosen for themselves. While this may not be a big deal with some, it a very big deal for me as my Govt. is not empowered under the law take that choice from me.

“No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.” –Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, 1816. ME 15:24

What I find as truley disturbing here is the willingness of so many to strip their fellow citizens of their rights for their own. So while you wish to have cheap healthcare I submit respectfully that anyone who supports this sort of effort contained in both these bills does so because they have a short sighted vision on healthcare and support those who really do not wish to solve the real issues that effect costs.

You are simply NOT paying attention, sir. Here is Chuck Grassley with an update as of about 1:30pm today discussing the COMPROMISE Senate Finance bill, which is the ONLY policy bill that will be considered. He discusses the demise of the House bill that you painstakingly read and posted for review, as well as the Kennedy bill of several weeks ago. The Senate Finance Committee went into closed session just a few moments ago and will work on the balance of cost containment through the evening. Grassley says on this tape that they still need to close the gap on about $200 billion, and then they will have a deal.

msnbc.com Video Player

Maggie, what you don't seem to grasp, is I'm not posting from the Kennedy bill, I'm posting from the working copy that Grassley's committee is working from. Further, i'm also posting from the house version that Waxman's committee is working from and the same one that Pelosi is supporting as the house version Again, I will restate my position, if the contents of these bills scare you then good, they should scare you. The only way this bill has a chance is if the public option is eliminated but that's an observation based on the hearings and from the comments made from both sides.

While the Finance Committee (Grassley, Baucus) may have the House Bill in front of them, they are hardly "working from it," designing their own policy around it. The Committee has been working on its own policy from ALL of the 16 proposals before them, not JUST the House bill (which btw was only produced last week). Now you're just inventing stuff that sounds plausible--but only to you. Grassley has been the most outspoken Senator AGAINST the House Bill. Why on earth would he have changed his mind over the weekend? THINK!!