D. appear set to pass Senate bill without voting on it

WaveCameCrashin

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

Here's some more links:

http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=7348
If you don't see how this is eviscerates the CONSTITUION after reading this than there's really no hope for any of you as far as Im concerned

something tells me that "letfreedomringblog" is a tea party or "conservative" blog site, and for that reason i am not going to even click the link because i am fairy certain its going to be heavily biased....like i said you find links to prove your point and i do the same. i'm not in the debate mood today as i just scored kc and stl tix

I actually was refering to the 2 links above that one. But who the fuck cares dude if it is. So in other words guess you don't have a problem with this ?

Any means to an end is that it ?

How can you even support something like this and say you support the constituion ?

gimmesometruth27

prfctlefts wrote:

I actually was refering to the 2 links above that one. But who the fuck cares dude if it is. So in other words guess you don't have a problem with this ?

Any means to an end is that it ?

How can you even support something like this and say you support the constituion ?

1. I CARE because i am not going to waste my time reading your propaganda.

2. i don't have a problem beacuse it is not strictly prohibitted by the constitution.

face it, your side lost the elections, you have to deal with the outcome. i dealt with it for 8 years, now its your turn. if the GOP had really been even halfway interested in playing ball and fixing health care their way they would have done it way before now. obama has given them a year actually over a year and they have done nothing but stall, whine and complain...

Starfall

prfctlefts wrote:

as far as reconciliation: yes the republicans have used it more,17 out 0f 23. Reducing deficits or increasing surpluses not using for to pass a bill as large as heallthcare.

So... how would you classify the $1.3 trillion worth of tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires that George W Bush signed with a Republican congress? Reducing the deficit? Increasing surpluses? Passing a smaller bill than healthcare (which costs $800 billion over 10 years)?

I really can't be bothered to address the rest of what you posted, since we've gone through all this before. I think you're a good guy underneath (you're a Pearl Jam fan, that's proof enough ) but sooner or later you're going to have to acknowledge that I have made some very good points that you and the right wing echo chamber and the talking points you bring up just can't address.

WaveCameCrashin

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

I actually was refering to the 2 links above that one. But who the fuck cares dude if it is. So in other words guess you don't have a problem with this ?

Any means to an end is that it ?

How can you even support something like this and say you support the constituion ?

1. I CARE because i am not going to waste my time reading your propaganda.

2. i don't have a problem beacuse it is not strictly prohibitted by the constitution.

face it, your side lost the elections, you have to deal with the outcome. i dealt with it for 8 years, now its your turn. if the GOP had really been even halfway interested in playing ball and fixing health care their way they would have done it way before now. obama has given them a year actually over a year and they have done nothing but stall, whine and complain...

I don't know why I even care or much less waste my time and energy on DRONES like you.
:roll: :? :lolno: This isn't propaganda. I don't know how to make it any more clear to you. It's a violation of the constituion. I know I know you could care less about that thing right ?
http://www.louise.house.gov/ I guess this is just a made up person, by the way she's the one who wants to do this.
Deal with the outcome ??? The only outcome your going to see is if they try this shit they will loose both houses. which they already stand to do in November.

Please tell me what it's like living in denial ?? and.....
You really need to change your user name becuase you wouldn't know the TRUTH if it kicked you in the face.

WaveCameCrashin

Starfall wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

as far as reconciliation: yes the republicans have used it more,17 out 0f 23. Reducing deficits or increasing surpluses not using for to pass a bill as large as heallthcare.

So... how would you classify the $1.3 trillion worth of tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires that George W Bush signed with a Republican congress? Reducing the deficit? Increasing surpluses? Passing a smaller bill than healthcare (which costs $800 billion over 10 years)?

I really can't be bothered to address the rest of what you posted, since we've gone through all this before. I think you're a good guy underneath (you're a Pearl Jam fan, that's proof enough ) but sooner or later you're going to have to acknowledge that I have made some very good points that you and the right wing echo chamber and the talking points you bring up just can't address.

Oh so now you can't be botherd :roll: That's classisc.
Im not a millionaire and certainly not billionaire more like a hundredaire,and I got a TAX cut.

JESUS How many more times do I have to say this ?????

THIS HAS NOTHING TO WITH RECONCILIATION !!!!!!!!

Not to mention if this bill does pass it's not even going to go into effect for another 3 years,and how do you think they are going to pay for it ?

Raise taxes how else do you think ???

gimmesometruth27

prfctlefts wrote:

I don't know why I even care or much less waste my time and energy on DRONES like you.
:roll: :? :lolno: This isn't propaganda. I don't know how to make it any more clear to you. It's a violation of the constituion. I know I know you could care less about that thing right ?
http://www.louise.house.gov/ I guess this is just a made up person, by the way she's the one who wants to do this.
Deal with the outcome ??? The only outcome your going to see is if they try this shit they will loose both houses. which they already stand to do in November.

Please tell me what it's like living in denial ?? and.....
You really need to change your user name becuase you wouldn't know the TRUTH if it kicked you in the face.

ahhh name calling again i see...hey, whatever man...you can not stand it when people disagree with you or you can't persuade people to your side of the issue, so you resort to name calling and making fun of my screen name...what is next, taking issue with my signature or making fun of my avatar?? how academic of you.

if it is a violation of the constitution, which article or section? if it is a violation of the constitution then why are the only people concerned about it the right wing blogosphere and fox news and the teabaggers, who most likely do not know the constitution from a hole in the ground...their heads are so filled with lies and disinformation like death panels and whatnot that they don't even know what is true and what is false...we want action and this bill needs to pass. in my opinion it is not strong enough, as i want single payor but it is a start...what is wrong with not allowing insurance companies to drop you for a pre-existing condition and what is wrong with not allowing sudden and drastic premium increases?? i have talked at length about my positions in the other threads and frankly i am done discussing this with you.

again i am not clicking your link. i just can not be bothered to look at your information anymore on this issue. coming from you it is probably just another stolen blog. i have my mind made up and my ideas of what is best for the country. i just see things differently than you do. if that makes me a drone then so be it.

quick question, why are you so quick to attack me when people in this thread are making excellent points counter to your assertions and you are ignoring them??

Starfall

prfctlefts wrote:

Starfall wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

as far as reconciliation: yes the republicans have used it more,17 out 0f 23. Reducing deficits or increasing surpluses not using for to pass a bill as large as heallthcare.

So... how would you classify the $1.3 trillion worth of tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires that George W Bush signed with a Republican congress? Reducing the deficit? Increasing surpluses? Passing a smaller bill than healthcare (which costs $800 billion over 10 years)?

I really can't be bothered to address the rest of what you posted, since we've gone through all this before. I think you're a good guy underneath (you're a Pearl Jam fan, that's proof enough ) but sooner or later you're going to have to acknowledge that I have made some very good points that you and the right wing echo chamber and the talking points you bring up just can't address.

Oh so now you can't be botherd :roll: That's classisc.
Im not a millionaire and certainly not billionaire more like a hundredaire,and I got a TAX cut.

JESUS How many more times do I have to say this ?????

THIS HAS NOTHING TO WITH RECONCILIATION !!!!!!!!

Not to mention if this bill does pass it's not even going to go into effect for another 3 years,and how do you think they are going to pay for it ?

Raise taxes how else do you think ???

Well, not quite a novel use of the straw man argument, but I gotta give ya props. Neither am I and I got a tax cut too. But it still doesn't address the salient fact that the $1.3 trillion tax cut exploded the national debt and forced the government to start borrowing more money just to make ends meet. I thought you conservative fellows were all about keeping debt low and not borrowing money?

And really, I'm not a huge fan of the proposed reconciliation bill either. I already said I don't like the excise tax system that the Senate inserted to pay for it - that's going to hit 80% of all Americans, not just the ones with good health care plans (given the horrible misnomer "cadillac plans" as if they were some fancy indulgence). I don't understand why you keep beating this particular horse after it's dead.
We're ultimately not going to cut costs as long as we leave the insurance companies in charge. Only a single payer system will ever get us on the track to fiscal responsibility as far as health care. It worked for every other industrialized country in the world, why not us?

KDH12

A few points....

- the system needs to be fixed and anything is better then nothing..... our health care system cost society as a whole millions as is, so the gains with the current bill are better then the losses of the current situation (ie insurance companies raise premiums and say that they have to becuase the cost of treatment is going up, they # of sick is going up and the covered are paying for the the uncovered) so you are already paying for the uninsured via your premiums, why not have your prems stay a lower constant rate and pay for others via your taxes (which is what the mandate would do)

- instead of bitching propose something that will cover millions of people (btw Massachusetts has a mandate for insurance and it seems to be working overall) either way something needs to be done. I have spent the last two days at the county hospital here in Chicago which is where the uninsured goes to get treatment. The system is overwhelmed right now. The lines there have been growing over the last two years and when I sit there and look around at all the people I see folks that need treatment....... mental health, disability and such.... but most get denied medicaid

- they current process to get a bill passed might seem shady but it is the ONLY way to get something done. Congress apparently is only able to work unless they are passes tax cuts or authorizing war. Or I suppose holding a hearing investigating the latest news story. The point being the harder issues... Health Care, Immigration, Social Security and such..... nothing gets done unless it is jammed through the path of least resistance. We are working off systems that are 40-50 years old and need to be updated and revised.

- why doesn't anything get done...... because our elected officials are trying to please all of the people all of the time, doesn't work too often

WaveCameCrashin

Starfall wrote:

I thought you conservative fellows were all about keeping debt low and not borrowing money?

I am. Look there's no denying that Bush spent way to much,but that's not what this thread is about.

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

if it is a violation of the constitution, which article or section? if it is a violation of the constitution?

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A1Sec7Article 1 Section 7 - Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

You can't pass a bill without voting on it and saying you did or didn't.... Jesus man this is basic high school civics..and that's what congresswoman Slaughter wants to do.

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

if it is a violation of the constitution then why are the only people concerned about it the right wing blogosphere and fox news and the teabaggers, who most likely do not know the constitution from a hole in the ground...

Maybe it's because we want to start over on this bill, and most of you on the left are willing to do whatever it takes to get this bill passed, even if it is a violation of our constituion. You actually think the other networks are going to even mention something like this :roll: Yeah right... How in the world this doesn't bother
some people is very disturbing to me. You say that I don't know the constituion. Well you are wrong in that respect. I agree with you that there are many on the right that don't know anything about it ,but there are probably just as many on the left that don't know and don't even care.

KDH12 wrote:

they current process to get a bill passed might seem shady but it is the ONLY way to get something done.

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

we want action and this bill needs to pass.

So we should ignore what the constituion says ? :wtf: :crazy:


For the record I agree with the fact that we need to do something about the high cost of premiums...Just so you know not that any of you care but my mom pays over $400 a month for health ins, She's 60 ,non smoker,doesn't drink, all she has is high blood presure. But even she doesn' want this biill to pass.

our premiums will go up and so will are taxes on goods and services not to mention we will loose jobs, You know those people that work for those evil ins companies.

What do you think that's going to happen to those people ?

aerial

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

http://dailycaller.com/2010/03/12/house-democrats-appear-set-to-pass-senate-bill-without-voting-on-it/
House Democrats appear set to pass Senate bill without voting on it
By Jon Ward 03/12/10 at 1:24 PM




House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaks with fellow lawmakers outside the West Wing of the White House after meeting with President Barack Obama in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 6, 2010. Left to right are House Ways and Means Chairman Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., House Education and Labor Chairman Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., Pelosi, House Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., and House Energy and Commerce Chairman Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
Republicans now expect Democrats to pass health care through the House with a trick only Capitol Hill could dream up: approving the Senate bill without voting on it.

Democrats will vote on a separate bill that includes language stating that the original Senate bill is “deemed passed.”

So by voting for the first bill — a reconciliation measure to fix certain things in the Senate bill — that will automatically pass the second bill — the original Senate bill — without a separate roll call taking place.

It’s called the “Slaughter Solution” (prepare for a weekend of endless TV gabbing about it).

And after debating House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on the chamber floor, Minority Whip Eric Cantor emerged convinced that Democrats are going to use the tactic, and that they won’t allow Republicans, and the public, to see the text of any legislation for 72 hours before a vote.

“I can infer that we’re going to see a rule that will deem the Senate bill as having passed, and at the same time not even have 72 hours to even look at what they are passing,” Cantor, a Virginia Republican, said in an interview outside his office at the Capitol.

“The outrage to me on the part of the public is going to be focused on the fact that there is not even an up or down vote, a clean up or down vote,” Cantor said.

Here’s the reason Democrats are using such a complicated procedure: many in the House completely do not trust the Senate to pass fixes to the bill passed by the Senate in December. But according to the rules of reconciliation, the House must go first in passing the Senate bill and passing a reconciliation fix.

So House Democrats have been searching for a way to alleviate members’ concerns that if they vote for the Senate bill and the Senate does nothing to fix it, they will be hung out to dry as having supported a piece of legislation that many across the country dislike, either for spending reasons, or because of special provisions like the extra money for Nebraska’s Medicaid population (the “Cornhusker kickback”).

Technically, using the “Slaughter solution,” they’ll never have voted for the bill they find odious, even if their vote on the reconciliation legislation will have been the vote that passed the Senate bill into law.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, alluded to all this at her weekly press conference Friday.

“There are certain assurances that they want and that we will get for them before I ask them to take a vote,” Pelosi said.

The “Slaughter solution” is named for House Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter, the New York Democrat who came up with the idea. She told the Daily Caller on Thursday that the chances of her procedure being used were “pretty good.”

Despite doubt among some on Capitol Hill on whether the “Slaughter solution” was feasible, Cantor expressed no doubt that the tactic could be used.

“It’s a self-executing rule. It is akin to passage but hidden in a rule as a side-note, passing the 2,700-page, $1 trillion bill, oh by the way,” he said.

Hoyer rejected the idea that Republicans have not had enough time to review the legislation.

“You have had months to review the substance of that bill. You don’t like it. We understand. You’re going to oppose it. We understand that as well. The fact of the matter is you cannot say you have had no notice of each and every provision for over two months,” said Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat.

Cantor said he wanted 72 hours to review the final text of the reconciliation bill.

“The reconciliation bill is new text. He claims it’s old hat, but this is clearly where they’re reconciling differences,” Cantor said, expressing concern that Democrats would rush the final text to the House floor for a vote to keep “sweeteners” used to buy off votes from being discovered.

Democrats are coalescing around a schedule for the bill’s route to the House floor for a vote. They are expecting a final score from the Congressional Budget Office later today.

On Monday, the House Budget Committee will mark the bill up, leading to an expected vote in the Rules Committee on Wednesday, with a final vote by the full House possible next weekend.


[url][/url]

The question remains, however, whether Pelosi will even be able to round up enough votes to pass a bill.

Momentum continued to go the wrong direction for her on Friday, as two more Democrats said they are opposed to the bill.

This just proves even more how out of control the Democrats are. NEVER in the history of our republic has this ever been done. This congrees is fully aligned against what the people want. These representative branches do not represnt the american people any more and either does Obama.Unlees you support an authoritarian Gov.as long as it supports your agenda. All you libs need to speak up and speak out against this.

This is a COMPLETE VIOLATION OF OUR CONSTITUION and everthing it stands for. Think about this for a minute before you comment. Were talking about the house acting as they already voted under article1 sec. 7 clause 2 on an underlined bill. when in fact all they are voting on are amendments called recocilation to a bill that does not exist in the house. :wtf: :x :?

:roll: how about a link from a legit news source and not from a blog site??

if this is so unconstitutional why has it been used before, and at least 2.5 times more by gop controlled congress than dem controlled congress??

the gop has had 10 years of majority to do something about health care and did nothing. obama gave them over a year to come to the table and negotiate but all they did is put their fingers in their ears and scream "LA LA LA LA I CAN"T HEAR YOU!" or just a plain old "NOOOOOOOOO!!!". they had their chance, it serves them right, fuck 'em... whiney little babies...

The subject is not about Reconciliation there new plan rumored to supposedly pass the bill is the Slaughter solution....

Can you provide links were the Slaughter Solution has been used before?

The purpose of the Slaughter amendment is not to avoid a filibuster in the Senate. It is designed to avoid having House members actually vote on the Senate bill. The whole point is to “deem” the Senate bill passed without actually having a recorded vote on the bill. That is what whole constitutionality question is about, not reconciliation.


Is the Slaughter Solution constitutional?
Can the House vote to adopt a rule which “deems” that a particular bill has been passed, even if that particular bill has not been passed?

http://volokh.com/2010/03/13/is-the-slaughter-solution-constitutional/#comments

WaveCameCrashin

It's that the house of representatives if they adopt this sluaghter rule ( so called ) will be enacting in a brazen violation of artcle 1 sec. 7 of the constituion


They have to vote on a bill with yays or nays with their name beside their vote before it can be amended. That's what the constituion says...

aerial wrote:

Can you provide links were the Slaughter Solution has been used before?

Clinton Vs city of NY 1998..

have to go to work will update later

aerial

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

http://dailycaller.com/2010/03/12/house-democrats-appear-set-to-pass-senate-bill-without-voting-on-it/
House Democrats appear set to pass Senate bill without voting on it
By Jon Ward 03/12/10 at 1:24 PM




House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaks with fellow lawmakers outside the West Wing of the White House after meeting with President Barack Obama in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 6, 2010. Left to right are House Ways and Means Chairman Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., House Education and Labor Chairman Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., Pelosi, House Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., and House Energy and Commerce Chairman Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
Republicans now expect Democrats to pass health care through the House with a trick only Capitol Hill could dream up: approving the Senate bill without voting on it.

Democrats will vote on a separate bill that includes language stating that the original Senate bill is “deemed passed.”

So by voting for the first bill — a reconciliation measure to fix certain things in the Senate bill — that will automatically pass the second bill — the original Senate bill — without a separate roll call taking place.

It’s called the “Slaughter Solution” (prepare for a weekend of endless TV gabbing about it).

And after debating House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on the chamber floor, Minority Whip Eric Cantor emerged convinced that Democrats are going to use the tactic, and that they won’t allow Republicans, and the public, to see the text of any legislation for 72 hours before a vote.

“I can infer that we’re going to see a rule that will deem the Senate bill as having passed, and at the same time not even have 72 hours to even look at what they are passing,” Cantor, a Virginia Republican, said in an interview outside his office at the Capitol.

“The outrage to me on the part of the public is going to be focused on the fact that there is not even an up or down vote, a clean up or down vote,” Cantor said.

Here’s the reason Democrats are using such a complicated procedure: many in the House completely do not trust the Senate to pass fixes to the bill passed by the Senate in December. But according to the rules of reconciliation, the House must go first in passing the Senate bill and passing a reconciliation fix.

So House Democrats have been searching for a way to alleviate members’ concerns that if they vote for the Senate bill and the Senate does nothing to fix it, they will be hung out to dry as having supported a piece of legislation that many across the country dislike, either for spending reasons, or because of special provisions like the extra money for Nebraska’s Medicaid population (the “Cornhusker kickback”).

Technically, using the “Slaughter solution,” they’ll never have voted for the bill they find odious, even if their vote on the reconciliation legislation will have been the vote that passed the Senate bill into law.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, alluded to all this at her weekly press conference Friday.

“There are certain assurances that they want and that we will get for them before I ask them to take a vote,” Pelosi said.

The “Slaughter solution” is named for House Rules Committee Chairman Louise Slaughter, the New York Democrat who came up with the idea. She told the Daily Caller on Thursday that the chances of her procedure being used were “pretty good.”

Despite doubt among some on Capitol Hill on whether the “Slaughter solution” was feasible, Cantor expressed no doubt that the tactic could be used.

“It’s a self-executing rule. It is akin to passage but hidden in a rule as a side-note, passing the 2,700-page, $1 trillion bill, oh by the way,” he said.

Hoyer rejected the idea that Republicans have not had enough time to review the legislation.

“You have had months to review the substance of that bill. You don’t like it. We understand. You’re going to oppose it. We understand that as well. The fact of the matter is you cannot say you have had no notice of each and every provision for over two months,” said Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat.

Cantor said he wanted 72 hours to review the final text of the reconciliation bill.

“The reconciliation bill is new text. He claims it’s old hat, but this is clearly where they’re reconciling differences,” Cantor said, expressing concern that Democrats would rush the final text to the House floor for a vote to keep “sweeteners” used to buy off votes from being discovered.

Democrats are coalescing around a schedule for the bill’s route to the House floor for a vote. They are expecting a final score from the Congressional Budget Office later today.

On Monday, the House Budget Committee will mark the bill up, leading to an expected vote in the Rules Committee on Wednesday, with a final vote by the full House possible next weekend.

The question remains, however, whether Pelosi will even be able to round up enough votes to pass a bill.

Momentum continued to go the wrong direction for her on Friday, as two more Democrats said they are opposed to the bill.

This just proves even more how out of control the Democrats are. NEVER in the history of our republic has this ever been done. This congrees is fully aligned against what the people want. These representative branches do not represnt the american people any more and either does Obama.Unlees you support an authoritarian Gov.as long as it supports your agenda. All you libs need to speak up and speak out against this.

This is a COMPLETE VIOLATION OF OUR CONSTITUION and everthing it stands for. Think about this for a minute before you comment. Were talking about the house acting as they already voted under article1 sec. 7 clause 2 on an underlined bill. when in fact all they are voting on are amendments called recocilation to a bill that does not exist in the house. :wtf: :x :?

:roll: how about a link from a legit news source and not from a blog site??

if this is so unconstitutional why has it been used before, and at least 2.5 times more by gop controlled congress than dem controlled congress??

the gop has had 10 years of majority to do something about health care and did nothing. obama gave them over a year to come to the table and negotiate but all they did is put their fingers in their ears and scream "LA LA LA LA I CAN"T HEAR YOU!" or just a plain old "NOOOOOOOOO!!!". they had their chance, it serves them right, fuck 'em... whiney little babies...

THE REPUBLICAN PLAN:
COMMON-SENSE HEALTH CARE REFORMS OUR NATION CAN AFFORD

http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare

gimmesometruth27

aerial wrote:

THE REPUBLICAN PLAN:
COMMON-SENSE HEALTH CARE REFORMS OUR NATION CAN AFFORD

http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare

the words GOP and SOLUTIONS and HEALTHCARE do not belong in the same sentence or url together...

aerial

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

aerial wrote:

THE REPUBLICAN PLAN:
COMMON-SENSE HEALTH CARE REFORMS OUR NATION CAN AFFORD

http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare

the words GOP and SOLUTIONS and HEALTHCARE do not belong in the same sentence or url together...

You are the one complaining that the Republicans don’t have an alternative plan....Well here it is....You refuse to listen or even admit they have a plan.....at least check it out

gimmesometruth27

aerial wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

aerial wrote:

THE REPUBLICAN PLAN:
COMMON-SENSE HEALTH CARE REFORMS OUR NATION CAN AFFORD

http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare

the words GOP and SOLUTIONS and HEALTHCARE do not belong in the same sentence or url together...

You are the one complaining that the Republicans don’t have an alternative plan....Well here it is....You refuse to listen or even admit they have a plan.....at least check it out

i did check it out and i read that website and wached boehner's bullshit video, and my official response is....

I
I
I
I
V


wait for it....
I
I
I
I
I
V




:roll:

WaveCameCrashin

Your wasting your time aeiral. He will never get it becuase he thinks a gov takeover is the answer to the problem. When in fact it's not. Rather than trying things like letting us buy across state lines which would create more compition which would bring down prices.

All the experts from both sides are saying that it's going to be a train wreck. And it will change this country forever for the worse. It will do nothing but put us more in debt and grow the government. See ariel they think they know what's best for us.When they don't and even though we are saying no they don't care because they are on a hudge power trip. They want to control every aspect of our lives and this is just the beginning.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/ ... 0344.shtml

gimmesometruth27

prfctlefts wrote:

Your wasting your time aeiral. He will never get it becuase he thinks a gov takeover is the answer to the problem. When in fact it's not. Rather than trying things like letting us buy across state lines which would create more compition which would bring down prices.

All the experts from both sides are saying that it's going to be a train wreck. And it will change this country forever for the worse. It will do nothing but put us more in debt and grow the government. See ariel they think they know what's best for us.When they don't and even though we are saying no they don't care because they are on a hudge power trip. They want to control every aspect of our lives and this is just the beginning.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/ ... 0344.shtml

that article in your cbs link was reprinted from the new ledger, another right wing, anti democrat, anti tax and small government website...not an unbiased word in any of the 7 articles i read on the front page on their site....it is right up your alley..

http://newledger.com/

WaveCameCrashin

So what dude. I mean if it came from the Huffington post would you believe it then ?
Or what about Move on ? Would you then.

I mean really . facts are facts even the CBO is saying prices will go up

KDH12

prfctlefts wrote:

So what dude. I mean if it came from the Huffington post would you believe it then ?
Or what about Move on ? Would you then.

I mean really . facts are facts even the CBO is saying prices will go up

from what I have read the CBO numbers are not 100% accurate as well, partly becuase the bill looks at the next ten years, the CBO does not, but the first three years is more about developing the revenue for the bill.

Some, ONLY SOME, of the programs in the bill do not take affect till 2014, so yes some taxes will go up and for 3 years the fruits of those taxes will not be seen so you could stretch the truth and that say you aren't getting much for those taxes..... look at the big picture

KDH12

prfctlefts wrote:

So we should ignore what the constituion says ? :wtf: :crazy:


For the record I agree with the fact that we need to do something about the high cost of premiums...Just so you know not that any of you care but my mom pays over $400 a month for health ins, She's 60 ,non smoker,doesn't drink, all she has is high blood presure. But even she doesn' want this biill to pass.

our premiums will go up and so will are taxes on goods and services not to mention we will loose jobs, You know those people that work for those evil ins companies.

What do you think that's going to happen to those people ?

I still do not see evidence where prems will go up under this plan, where taxes on goods will go up (not sure what that has to do with this topic) or where people will lose jobs.

I see it as reverse...... prems will hold steady, jobs will be increased within the health care field cuz more people will access services, wages will go up (wages are going down right now partly cuz of company insurance cost) and yes SOME taxes MIGHT go up (not on goods) but I suspect that the Obama Admin, will structure taxes to cover cost nda be fair for all the people.

and stop bringing up the constitution, I do not think this is a constitutionals debate if it is we can start debating how the Bush admin violated the constitution...... aka going to war under false pretenses