Health Summit

[moreluck]

I watched/listened to this entire summit. Big waste of time. Did my tax money pay for their lunch too??
I sure hope not.

The public display showed to me what an arrogant, pompous, jerk we have for a leader and what a wimpy rag doll the veep is.

Biden's microphone caught him saying the veep's job was easy, like being the grandpa.......Ok, that's just scary.

The president alone spoke more minutes than all the Republicans combined.

Loved it when the pres. had his figures wrong and Lamar ? had the numbers correct. At least the people got to see the process and now we all wonder how they ever do anything in D.C.

 

[Babagounj]

just another staged event.
notice that only invited persons could attend, not very smart packing the room.
notice bho called everyone by their first name, but it was "mr president" only for him.
no one brought up how to stop the illegals from draining the system.
no one brought up tort reform, putting a cap on medical lawsuits .
no one brought up letting insurance companies sell policies across state lines.
do these three things and you get REAL health reform, everything else is just a waste of time.

 

[scratch]

That was just a staged show. Democrats got 233 minutes of time, the Republicans got 114. This event only shows why nothing ever gets done in Washington. The Democrats kept telling sob stories about health care problems, the Repubicans spent the time to finally be able to state solutions that would actually improve health care. The Democrats will still try to cram through their bill that polls show that 75% of Americans don't want.

 

[moreluck]

They did bring up the "across state lines' thing because someone was mentioning Californians being able to purchase ins. in Oregon.

 

[tieguy]

I'm surprised TOS did not start another thread telling us how Obama slayed the lions in their den.

Add this conference to a long list of failures for Obama. I'm not sure why he keeps putting his personal credibility on the line. When the president holds a conference like he did he is supposed to get results. Instead another staged event that turned into a failure.

 

[moreluck]

Yeah, but having his 'mug' on TV is all he's after !!

 

[unionman]

I'm surprised TOS did not start another thread telling us how Obama slayed the lions in their den.

Add this conference to a long list of failures for Obama. I'm not sure why he keeps putting his personal credibility on the line. When the president holds a conference like he did he is supposed to get results. Instead another staged event that turned into a failure.

Yeah, worst economy since 1929 as been turned around and he is a failure. What a dumb thing to say. You and morelies just hate the Dems so bad it wouldn't matter if George Washington was president, you would say he is worthless. Have you ever admitted that something Obama is doing was good? I doubt it and it just shows how cynical and full of hate you are.

 

[moreluck]

As Robert Byrd, (D-W.V.), one of the original authors of the reconciliation rule, explained, “Reconciliation was intended to adjust revenue and spending levels in order to reduce deficits...it was not designed to…restructure the entire health care system.” He warns that using reconciliation for health care would “violate the intent and spirit of the budget process, and do serious injury to the Constitutional role of the Senate.” In fact, in 1985, the Senate adopted the “Byrd rule,” which prohibits the use of reconciliation for any “extraneous issue” that does not directly change revenues or expenditures. Clearly, large portions of the health care bill, ranging from mandates to insurance regulation to establishing “exchanges,” do not meet that requirement

 

[av8torntn]

Yeah, worst economy since 1929 as been turned around and he is a failure. What a dumb thing to say. You and morelies just hate the Dems so bad it wouldn't matter if George Washington was president, you would say he is worthless. Have you ever admitted that something Obama is doing was good? I doubt it and it just shows how cynical and full of hate you are.

Not sure how you figure Obama turned the economy around. After a year of this failed presidency we have more people unemployed, more homes in foreclosure, and more national debt. Oh wait I now see what you mean by turned around. This failure has turned things downward.

 

[av8torntn]

"In contrast, it was the president's turn to look ill at ease - sometimes even contemptuous of his foes. And while the president once again had facts and figures at his fingertips, his team members were a disgrace. They substituted emotionalism for logic and reason by relating health insurance horror stories designed to make the GOP look like heartless monsters. That sort of thing might work in a campaign commercial, but when placed against the devastating comebacks offered by the Republicans, it sounded silly."

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/02/white_house_strategy_backfires.html

 

[Lue C Fur]

Yeah, worst economy since 1929 as been turned around and he is a failure. What a dumb thing to say. You and morelies just hate the Dems so bad it wouldn't matter if George Washington was president, you would say he is worthless. Have you ever admitted that something Obama is doing was good? I doubt it and it just shows how cynical and full of hate you are.

It shows how you think he is the 2nd comming of Christ and you worship the ground he walks on. Take off your "Obama blinders"...even the Liberal dominated media is starting to take jabs at the Messiah. The economy is just booming right now... LMAO!!!

 

[unionman]

It shows how you think he is the 2nd comming of Christ and you worship the ground he walks on. Take off your "Obama blinders"...even the Liberal dominated media is starting to take jabs at the Messiah. The economy is just booming right now... LMAO!!!

who asked you? At least I admit when Republicans have good ideas and criticize Democrats when they have bad ones, which is quit often. You and these other cronies on here just stick to your script and bash anything Democrat, good or bad. So who is the idiot? Someone that is as stubborn as Bush or somebody with an open mind like Obama.
You of all people voting Republican, the main reason Northwest mechanics union went down was because of the cohesion the company had with Bush's administration. While no other airline employee was allowed to go out on strike Northwest was allowed to because they had scabs waiting. Do you think the new mediator is more on our side or UPS's?

 

[Lue C Fur]

who asked you?
It an open forum...so no one has to ask permission.
At least I admit when Republicans have good ideas and criticize Democrats when they have bad ones, which is quit often.
You win a gold star!!!!
So what are some of Obamas bad ideas?
You and these other cronies on here just stick to your script and bash anything Democrat, good or bad. So who is the idiot? Someone that is as stubborn as Bush or somebody with an open mind like Obama.
Its tuff to find anything good about a left wing socialist with a shady past. But i did give him props for seeing that we need to have more nuclear power plants and to drill for more oil...oh wait he was against that a year ago so it took him awhile to see the light.
You of all people voting Republican, (actually im independent) the main reason Northwest mechanics union went down was because of the cohesion the company had with Bush's administration. While no other airline employee was allowed to go out on strike Northwest was allowed to because they had scabs waiting.
I would blame that on not having pilots, stews, etc on board when you struck. I supported you guys though so be careful who you bash brother.
Do you think the new mediator is more on our side or UPS's?

We will see March 9th.

 

[bbsam]

As Robert Byrd, (D-W.V.), one of the original authors of the reconciliation rule, explained, “Reconciliation was intended to adjust revenue and spending levels in order to reduce deficits...it was not designed to…restructure the entire health care system.” He warns that using reconciliation for health care would “violate the intent and spirit of the budget process, and do serious injury to the Constitutional role of the Senate.” In fact, in 1985, the Senate adopted the “Byrd rule,” which prohibits the use of reconciliation for any “extraneous issue” that does not directly change revenues or expenditures. Clearly, large portions of the health care bill, ranging from mandates to insurance regulation to establishing “exchanges,” do not meet that requirement

Although this was the intent of reconciliation, any idea of it's historical usage through the years by both parties?

 

[av8torntn]

Although this was the intent of reconciliation, any idea of it's historical usage through the years by both parties?

I do why?

It has been used to pass budget related items in the past by both parties. There was a threat to use it to allow drilling in the national wildlife refuge that did not come to pass. I am pretty sure they cannot use it to pass that silly mandate to force people to buy insurance. From my understanding it would gut a couple other provisions the dims consider mandatory for their plan to be successful as well that are non tax or spending items. This could very well be a check mate type move for the repubs. They will be able to campaign in the mid term races on a repeal of this unpopular spending as they would then only need the 51 votes as well attached to the next budget. Since the actual programs do not start for ten years a veto threat from the president would be meaningless as they could pass continuing funding resolutions a lesson learned, I hope, from the Clinton days. The bottom line is that politically the dims do not want to go down this road and right now it is posturing and if they do try to use this procedure many will consider health care reform a failure since the only thing it will be is another tax and spend bill.

 

[Jones]

Historical use of Budget Reconciliation

 

[bbsam]

I do why?

It has been used to pass budget related items in the past by both parties. There was a threat to use it to allow drilling in the national wildlife refuge that did not come to pass. I am pretty sure they cannot use it to pass that silly mandate to force people to buy insurance. From my understanding it would gut a couple other provisions the dims consider mandatory for their plan to be successful as well that are non tax or spending items. This could very well be a check mate type move for the repubs. They will be able to campaign in the mid term races on a repeal of this unpopular spending as they would then only need the 51 votes as well attached to the next budget. Since the actual programs do not start for ten years a veto threat from the president would be meaningless as they could pass continuing funding resolutions a lesson learned, I hope, from the Clinton days. The bottom line is that politically the dims do not want to go down this road and right now it is posturing and if they do try to use this procedure many will consider health care reform a failure since the only thing it will be is another tax and spend bill.

Why? Because history dictates that reconciliation has morphed into something that it was never intened to be and both parties have and will continue to take advantage of it. Simply stating what reconciliation was at it's inception does not bring us to what it is today. It has become a way to get things done that the majority cannot get 60 votes for. Personally, I would tell Democrats to get the biggest, baddest, all-encompassing bill they can that starts on day one and the dare the Republicans to repeal it the way they never repealed social security. But in all honesty I expect the democrats to prove themselve yet again to be a bunch of raging pansies.

I do think the republicans are afraid of that scenario though. Seemed like at the summit they were almost begging Obama to take reconciliation off the table.

 

[moreluck]

Well, my hope is that if Pelosi tries to " ram it " , that there won't be enough votes and that just maybe there are a few Democrats who really want to do what the people want. Fingers crossed !

 

[av8torntn]

Why? Because history dictates that reconciliation has morphed into something that it was never intened to be and both parties have and will continue to take advantage of it. Simply stating what reconciliation was at it's inception does not bring us to what it is today. It has become a way to get things done that the majority cannot get 60 votes for. Personally, I would tell Democrats to get the biggest, baddest, all-encompassing bill they can that starts on day one and the dare the Republicans to repeal it the way they never repealed social security. But in all honesty I expect the democrats to prove themselve yet again to be a bunch of raging pansies.

I do think the republicans are afraid of that scenario though. Seemed like at the summit they were almost begging Obama to take reconciliation off the table.

Well of course you are missing one thing. They will not have to repeal it all they will have to do is not fund it in the next budget. So the likely thing that will happen is that all they would end up with would be fewer seats in Congress. That my friend is a risk many will not want to take so they may have trouble even getting the 51 votes they need.

Looked to me like they were daring him to use the process as it just opens the door farther for them down the road to get things done they want. In time we shall see if he will take the bait.

 

[av8torntn]

Historical use of Budget Reconciliation

It is funny now how everyone is claiming somehow that cutting taxes has nothing to do with the budget but mandating everyone buy health insurance does. To each his own. I wish they would just go back to 67 votes to cut debate off on anything.