This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

It is almost July and no health care bill

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

I almost have to laugh it was not so serious, but the Republican senator from Alaska was complaining that her colleagues have no idea yet what is in the bill and the ramifications of the same. Special interests control congress. When a lobbyist gets shot at a practice, you get the sense of how embedded these folks are. They will write the bill and then tell their members what it contains. For all the criticism of the Obama administration and the ACA, they had open Senate hearings on the health care bill. They were criticized for forcing something through, but the irony of what the Republicans are currently doing is not being lost on its very own members.

View user profile
Lol... the dems had an open process? Lol... the pubs are being told what's in it... but not the dems... lol.

Pelosi even said as much. You're a joke. How do leftists become so lacking in self-awareness?

View user profile
If all trump does is undo what Obama did... I'd concede he was a success.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote:If all trump does is undo what Obama did... I'd concede he was a success.




He may even undo what Lincoln did.

View user profile

A bill is introduced by a member of Congress. In the case of The Affordable Care Act, it was first introduced into Congress as The Affordable Health Choices Act in July, 2009. It should be noted however that negotiations between the Democrats and Republicans regarding the issue of health care started long before the bill was introduced.

The first summit about the need for national health care was held at the White House in early 2009.http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/health/jan-june09/healthcare_03-05.html Citizens from several walks of life came together including health care workers, law makers, lobbyists, physicians and many more groups!
Between March/2009 and May/2009 there were no less than 17 different meetings between members of Congress discussing how the Affordable Care Act should look. (http://www.finance.senate.gov/issue/?id=32be19bd-491e-4192-812f-f65215c1ba65 )
During the summer of 2009 a bi-partisan committee made up of three Democrats and three Republicans met 31 times for a period of over 60 hours to develop what would ultimately become the Affordable Care Act. (http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/28/politics/supreme-court-health-timeline/index.html)

The bill is sent to the Appropriations Committee as well as many other committees as needed after it is introduced. It is during these “committee” meetings that negotiations and compromise begin on ANY bill sent to committee. Sometimes, a member of the committee may call for public hearings to gather more information about a proposed law and the impact it may have on the American people.

In July, 2009 The Senate’s Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee passed The Affordable Health Choices Act. This bill contained more than 160 amendments all added by the Republican members of the committee and all were approved. (http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/28/politics/supreme-court-health-timeline/index.html) In fact, this bill remained in committee for over a month. The 160 amendments to the bill will live in infamy as a bill that was “marked up” or changed by amendments as one of the largest changes in history.
Between July and December 2009 the bill was referred to several committees and a great deal of negotiation and compromise between the two parties continued during these meetings.
Each committee makes a decision about whether to table the bill, which means the bill is basically dead, or they can pass the bill, or they can hold hearings and further discuss the bill. The bill which would ultimately become the Affordable Care Act was passed by all the committees that reviewed it in the House and the Senate and sent to the full House and Senate for a vote.

When the bill has passed all its committees it is sent back to the House and Senate. While they utilize a similar process, the House bill and the Senate bill are often very different.

When the bill comes back to the full House or Senate, the bill is debated again on the Chamber floor. During this time there is continued negotiation and compromise before a bill can be voted upon. Members of the House can offer amendments to the bill and each of these as well as the bill itself is voted upon. It was a long and arduous process as the Affordable Care bill was debated in both chambers. Some of the “Obamacare” myths that are repeated over and over again in the media originated in these strenuous debates such death panels, chips being placed under someone’s skin to follow them and numerous others.
By December 2009 both the House and the Senate had passed their individual versions of what would become the Affordable Care Act. (http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/28/politics/supreme-court-health-timeline/index.html
Negotiations about the tenets of the Affordable Care Act, as can be seen by the previously documented evidence, occurred over and over again as the bill was introduced, and as it wove its way through various committees, including the joint House and Senate reconciliation committee prior to it being passed by both chambers and sent to President Obama for signature.

View user profile
PkrBum wrote: Lol... the dems had an open process? Lol... the pubs are being told what's in it... but not the dems... lol.

Pelosi even said as much. You're a joke. How do leftists become so lacking in self-awareness?

Jesus you're a moron! Can't you even discern what "self-awareness" means? It's pretty elementary.

View user profile
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-new-york-times-double-standard-on-obamacare/article/2610979

In the New York Times, reporter Robert Pear offers an overview of the "parliamentary tactic" Republicans might use to "obliterate Obamacare." (It appears the article's title originally used the word "trick" instead of tactic, but was later edited.) The "trick" is budget reconciliation.

Scroll halfway through the report and you will find a casual mention of Obamacare's history: "Congress also made changes to the Affordable Care Act in a reconciliation bill passed immediately after President Obama signed the health care overhaul in 2010."

That's quite the understatement.

Democrats, and some in the media, are suffering from selective and collective amnesia about Obamacare's passage. The reconciliation process, although not technically the process by which Obamacare became law, was critical to creating what we know today as Obamacare. Health reform as we know it was really two bills, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act.

Here's the whole history: Between April 2009 and January 2010, Democrats held a 60-vote majority in the Senate. During this time the Senate passed House Bill 3590 (on Christmas Eve 2009) that was finally named the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act." But this legislation was completely different from what was originally House Bill 3590. The original bill in the House concerned home loans for service members and was completely unrelated to healthcare.

(Avik Roy and I discuss the history of Obamacare in this podcast, and for a longer read, John Cannan helpfully follows the legislative process in an article for the Law Library Journal.)

The Senate essentially cut out all the language from House Bill 3590, even the title, and replaced it with health reform in an effort to rush Obamacare through. The House also passed healthcare legislation, but it was not House Bill 3590. The House healthcare bill was different. But — if you remember from "Schoolhouse Rock" — in order for a bill to become law, both houses have to pass the same bill.

Democrats lost their 60-vote supermajority on Jan. 19, 2010, when Massachusetts elected Republican Scott Brown in a special election to replace the deceased Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass. With Senate Republicans unified against the ACA and no way to get past a filibuster, this meant the Senate could not pass the House version of health reform, for lack of 60 votes. But House Democrats had problems with the Senate version, so Democratic lawmakers were in a bind.

To get the healthcare legislation they wanted, lawmakers crafted a strategy to pass the Senate version of health reform in the House (on March 21, 2010) and to follow that bill immediately with another, House Bill 4872 (ultimately passed on March 25, 2010). This latter bill made substantive changes to health reform, the changes House Democrats wanted, but was passed via the budget reconciliation process. Therefore, it required only 51 votes in the Senate to become law. Obama signed both bills into law, and together they make up what we know today as Obamacare, the ACA, or health reform.

Obamacare would not be what it is today without the budget reconciliation process, the same process Republicans are considering using to repeal major (budget-related) parts of Obamacare. It's a double standard to pretend that Republicans are using trickery or unprecedented tactics to repeal the misguided healthcare legislation, considering how critical reconciliation was to the law's creation.

View user profile
http://www.politico.com/story/2009/12/payoffs-for-states-get-reid-to-60-030815

Ben Nelson’s “Cornhusker Kickback,” as the GOP is calling it, got all the attention Saturday, but other senators lined up for deals as Majority Leader Harry Reid corralled the last few votes for a health reform package.

Nelson’s might be the most blatant – a deal carved out for a single state, a permanent exemption from the state share of Medicaid expansion for Nebraska, meaning federal taxpayers have to kick in an additional $45 million in the first decade.

But another Democratic holdout, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), took credit for $10 billion in new funding for community health centers, while denying it was a “sweetheart deal.” He was clearly more enthusiastic about a bill he said he couldn’t support just three days ago.

Nelson and Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) carved out an exemption for non-profit insurers in their states from a hefty excise tax. Similar insurers in the other 48 states will pay the tax.

Vermont and Massachusetts were given additional Medicaid funding, another plus for Sanders and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) Three states – Pennsylvania, New York and Florida – all won protections for their Medicare Advantage beneficiaries at a time when the program is facing cuts nationwide.

All of this came on top of a $300 million increase for Medicaid in Louisiana, designed to win the vote of Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu.

Under pressure from the White House to get a deal done by Christmas, Reid was unapologetic. He argued that, by definition, legislating means deal making and defended the special treatment for Nelson’s home state of Nebraska.

“You’ll find a number of states that are treated differently than other states. That’s what legislating is all about. It's compromise," he said.

It was Nelson who proved that he who plays hardest to get, gets the most.

He forced Reid to redraft the bill’s restrictions on federal funding of abortion. And while most insiders were focused on that deal, Nelson was quietly ensuring that his state would never have to pay for the Medicaid expansion being written into the bill – an agreement that had been in the works for weeks.

Medicaid is usually paid for with a mix of federal and state funding, but Nelson's carve out means that any Medicaid beneficiaries who join the program under the bill will be fully paid for by the federal government.

It's an important deal considering that many governors are worried that the Medicaid expansion will further strain already stressed state budgets – and one that came after Nebraska Gov.Dave Heineman called on Nelson to vote against the bill.


"The State of Nebraska cannot afford an unfunded mandate and uncontrolled spending of this magnitude,” the governor wrote to Nelson.


Nelson deferred all questions on the provision to Reid, saying only that he was “comfortable” the deal took care of Nebraska.

View user profile
But ya... I'm the one that's not self-aware... lol.

Full List of Backroom Health Deals "Deem and Pass" Healthcare Bill

"These negotiations will be on C-Span, and so the public will be part of the conversation and we'll see the choices that are being made." Guess who?

On Wednesday, March 17, 2010, House Majority Leader said that, "We're going to have a clean up or down vote on the Senate bill-that will be on the rule." According to Majority Leader, any Member who votes for the health care takeover rule will also be voting "straight up" for all of the bill's special deals.

Backroom Deals In the Democrats Health Care Takeover

Cornhusker Kickback: Perhaps the most well known in the Senate bill, the provision, included at the behest of Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), ensures that Nebraska would be the only state to have the full amount of its increased Medicaid costs paid for by the federal government.

The Louisiana Purchase: The Senate bill provides extra Medicaid funding for any state in which every county has been declared a disaster area. Because of Hurricane Katrina, Louisiana is the only state that would qualify for the money. The $300 million provision for Louisiana was slipped in late in the process to persuade Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) to support the health care takeover.

Gator Aid: At the request of Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fl), the Senate bill includes a formula for protecting certain Medicare Advantage enrollees from billions in cuts. The formula would only apply to five states, most notably to Florida in which 800,000 of the state's one million Medicare Advantage users would be exempt from cuts.

New England Handouts: In addition to the $100 million included in federal Medicaid payments for Nebraska, the bill provides two New England states with even more money Medicaid funding. According to CBO, the Senate bill now contains about $600 million in extra Medicaid cash to Vermont, and about $500 million in additional money for Medicaid to Massachusetts, making these three states the only to receive such funding. Despite claims that these cushy extras for a few states would be scaled back, reports indicate that the White House is still making deals so these states can keep the handouts.

The Dodd Clinic: Section 10502(a) of the bill provides $100 million for construction at an unnamed "health care facility" affiliated with an academic health center at a public research university in a state with only one public academic medical and dental school. Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) later sent a press release saying that he was securing the money for the University of Connecticut, and then Dodd bragged that, "These provisions will bring millions of dollars to the state so that Connecticut's residents can receive quality, affordable health care."

Montana Medicare Earmark: A provision slipped into the Senate bill by Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus (D-MT), Section 1881A(b)(2), specifically expands Medicare coverage for individuals who reside "in or around the geographic area subject to an emergency declaration made as of June 17, 2009." The area the bill refers to is an asbestos contaminated area near Libby, Montana, for which Sen. Max Baucus has been trying to secure funding for years.

View user profile

Guest


Guest
Given that his own party is sabotaging his term of office, it's a wonder he still continues to try and do his job that 60+ million Americans elected him to do.

Pacedog Original Gangsta wrote: ...do his job that 60+ million Americans elected him to do.

Which is 3 million fewer than voted for the other candidate. DUH! Not exactly a mandate, eh?

The Republicans have both houses of Congress and the Executive Branch and STILL can't get anything done.

His own party is disgusted with him because he DOES NOT UNDERSTAND GOVERNANCE. He's a  such blowhard and malignant egotist that no serious politician can stand him. He's TOXIC!

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

Guest


Guest
del.capslock wrote:
Pacedog Original Gangsta wrote: ...do his job that 60+ million Americans elected him to do.

Which is 3 million fewer than voted for the other candidate. DUH! Not exactly a mandate, eh?

The Republicans have both houses of Congress and the Executive Branch and STILL can't get anything done.

His own party is disgusted with him because he DOES NOT UNDERSTAND GOVERNANCE. He's a  such blowhard and malignant egotist that no serious politician can stand him. He's TOXIC!

Electoral college ... say it.

Pacedog Original Gangsta wrote:
del.capslock wrote:
Pacedog Original Gangsta wrote: ...do his job that 60+ million Americans elected him to do.

Which is 3 million fewer than voted for the other candidate. DUH! Not exactly a mandate, eh?

The Republicans have both houses of Congress and the Executive Branch and STILL can't get anything done.

His own party is disgusted with him because he DOES NOT UNDERSTAND GOVERNANCE. He's a  such blowhard and malignant egotist that no serious politician can stand him. He's TOXIC!

Electoral college ... say it.

You're the one that brought up the vote count, you dumb fuck! All I did was respond to YOUR comment.

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

Guest


Guest
Do you always curse? Seems like it. It's not required.

They may as well go ahead and nationalize the insurance industry.

The pubs are just as progressive as dems... and it's inevitable anyway.

View user profile
Hmmmmm wrote:Do you always curse? Seems like it. It's not required.

Yes, I do "curse" pretty much all the time and what you read is pretty much how I talk. If you don't like it, DON'T READ MY FUCKING POSTS!

Besides, the "cursing" is in YOUR head. To me it's just normal, uncensored adult conversation.

What's up with you anyway? First you're Pacedog, then guest and now Hmmm. You having trouble keeping all your personalities integrated? They have medication for that, you know. Maybe this'll help:

Dissociative Identity Disorder: Top Drugs That Work
http://www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/Dissociative-identity-disorder-drugs/2011/01/03/id/381764/

And it's in Newsmax! The irony is perfect.

View user profile http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum