Senate Has 60 Votes For Health Care: WashPost

[twa]

Fixed, this bill is clearly unconstitutional in multiple ways.

!

Like that has ever stopped them,I would not hold my breath on the courts.

Gonna be fun paying for this BS for some of you

Dick Morris and Eileen McGann :: Townhall.com Columnist

How Obamacare Will Hurt Young People

http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2009/12/19/how_obamacare_will_hurt_young_people

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Weblogs/TWSFP/TWSFPView.asp#14529

The Congressional Budget Office's score is in for the final Senate health bill, and it's amazing how little Americans would get for so much.

The Democrats are irresponsibly and disingenuously claiming that the bill would cost $871 billion over 10 years. But that's not what the CBO says. Rather, the CBO says that $871 billion would be the costs from 2010 to 2019 for expansions in insurance coverage alone. But less than 2 percent of those "10-year costs" would kick in before the fifth year of that span. In its real first 10 years (2014 to 2023), the CBO says that the bill would cost $1.8 trillion -- for insurance coverage expansions alone. Other parts of the bill would cost approximately $700 billion more, bringing the bill's full 10-year tab to approximately $2.5 trillion -- according to the CBO.

In those real first 10 years (2014 to 2023), Americans would have to pay over $1 trillion in additional taxes, over $1 trillion would be siphoned out of Medicare (over $200 billion out of Medicare Advantage alone) and spent on Obamacare, and deficits would rise by over $200 billion. They would rise, that is, unless Congress follows through on the bill's pledge to cut doctors' payments under Medicare by 21 percent next year and never raise them back up -- which would reduce doctors' enthusiasm for seeing Medicare patients dramatically.

[SnyderShrugged]

I wonder if any other Dem Senators will see the potential for "holding out" now? They have all seen how much Santa could bring them or their state for following the nelson/landrew/et al tactic. They would be dumb not to try and get theirs.

[SnyderShrugged]

Like that has ever stopped them,I would not hold my breath on the courts.

Gonna be fun paying for this BS for some of you

Dick Morris and Eileen McGann :: Townhall.com Columnist

How Obamacare Will Hurt Young People

http://townhall.com/columnists/DickMorrisandEileenMcGann/2009/12/19/how_obamacare_will_hurt_young_people

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Weblogs/TWSFP/TWSFPView.asp#14529

The Congressional Budget Office's score is in for the final Senate health bill, and it's amazing how little Americans would get for so much.

The Democrats are irresponsibly and disingenuously claiming that the bill would cost $871 billion over 10 years. But that's not what the CBO says. Rather, the CBO says that $871 billion would be the costs from 2010 to 2019 for expansions in insurance coverage alone. But less than 2 percent of those "10-year costs" would kick in before the fifth year of that span. In its real first 10 years (2014 to 2023), the CBO says that the bill would cost $1.8 trillion -- for insurance coverage expansions alone. Other parts of the bill would cost approximately $700 billion more, bringing the bill's full 10-year tab to approximately $2.5 trillion -- according to the CBO.

In those real first 10 years (2014 to 2023), Americans would have to pay over $1 trillion in additional taxes, over $1 trillion would be siphoned out of Medicare (over $200 billion out of Medicare Advantage alone) and spent on Obamacare, and deficits would rise by over $200 billion. They would rise, that is, unless Congress follows through on the bill's pledge to cut doctors' payments under Medicare by 21 percent next year and never raise them back up -- which would reduce doctors' enthusiasm for seeing Medicare patients dramatically.

I would really like the supporters of this bill to explain their support knowing the true costs from 2014 on.

[Midnight Judges]

I would really like the supporters of this bill to explain their support knowing the true costs from 2014 on.

It's worth it.

[Prosperity]

Lieberman pretty much singlehandedly made sure this bill would be the worst of possible compromise

[twa]

I would really like the supporters of this bill to explain their support knowing the true costs from 2014 on.

Since when has most any politician cared about costs?

C'mon SS you ain't naive

We didn't see it from the Reps in the recent past and sure ain't in this new Dem crew.

We are rapidly reaching a tipping point

[SnyderShrugged]

It's worth it.

This is actually something I respect from you MJ. I would rather an honest answer like this than a spin method that I expected from many on the subject.

I disagree that it is "worth it" though. I cant see how a bill that doesnt reach the goal of either universal coverage nor reductions in costs as advertised is worth it to any side of the debate.

[SnyderShrugged]

Since when has most any politician cared about costs?

C'mon SS you ain't naive

We didn't see it from the Reps in the recent past and sure ain't in this new Dem crew.

We are rapidly reaching a tipping point

I think you misunderstood.

I was asking for the local supporters here at ES to explain their support knowing the costs.

I sadly know all too well that the pols are bought and paid for. Just look at Nelson and his lovely honorable hold out based on fantasy pro-life principles.

[The 12th Commandment]

The fact that it isn't a given that everyone in our country have health care is what's ****ed up. Same as education it's not something we should even think we have a choice about.

How it's done is what politicians are for. (and yes, that's a little frightening)

[Fergasun]

I wonder if any other Dem Senators will see the potential for "holding out" now? They have all seen how much Santa could bring them or their state for following the nelson/landrew/et al tactic. They would be dumb not to try and get theirs.

I started a lone thread on that yesterday, no responses.

Why wouldn't Bayh do that?

[SnyderShrugged]

I started a lone thread on that yesterday, no responses.

Why wouldn't Bayh do that?

Oh darn! I'm sorry man! I would have posted in that one had I noticed.

I really cant understand why every senator wouldnt hold out now that they see the potential for gifts

[SnyderShrugged]

The fact that it isn't a given that everyone in our country have health care is what's ****ed up. Same as education it's not something we should even think we have a choice about.

How it's done is what politicians are for. (and yes, that's a little frightening)

what I dont get is why start with health care? Arent there many there products (and yes, thats what health care is) that are much more needed for survival and core needs than health care?

Why not an all out push for universal food, water, and homes?

[CrabR]

a great idea has turned into a joke. They are not interested in the public only something to pass before Christmas so they say they passed it a health care bill. This is a bill to benefit health care companies not consumers

Republicans are a joke from the onset for not even trying to form a decent proposal

so sick of both sides, Obama is Bush3, so disappointed

[SnyderShrugged]

a great idea has turned into a joke. They are not interested in the public only something to pass before Christmas so they say they passed it a health care bill. This is a bill to benefit health care companies not consumers

Republicans are a joke from the onset for not even trying to form a decent proposal

so sick of both sides, Obama is Bush3, so disappointed

:mad:

[81artmonk]

Middle class is a $200,000 yearly salary...dang son I want to be middle class in your neighborhood.

Very few and on a state by state basis.

One of the latest polls put the number or retired people disapproving of this bill at around 63%.

If it passes, don't expect them to support the dem party. Plus you can't promise people something than yank the carpet from under them in order to pay for something you think is neccesary.

[The 12th Commandment]

what I dont get is why start with health care? Arent there many there products (and yes, thats what health care is) that are much more needed for survival and core needs than health care?

Why not an all out push for universal food, water, and homes?

We already do all three of those things. Food stamps are available to anyone who is hungry in addition to the many local places that make up the slack. Water is available, how could you argue with that? Even here in the desert there are sources of free water all over town. Housing is too. Housing Authorities, Section (whatever it is), and shelters.

All of them are a mixture of private and public. Just like this health care bill will produce. The stuff you get for free is not of sufficient quality/quantity (but it is enough to live) to satisfy most people so they still manage to work up the motivation to go to work.

The fact that routine health care isn't part of that is puzzling. We then say they get help if it's catastrophic when we would have saved ourselves money by treating them earlier. That's just bad business. If we're going to do something, which in essence we have been doing, then let's do it right.

It's too expensive for the private groups to be much help where they can be with lodging and food and that's probably why we have the shortfall IMO.

Of course I see where you were really going with it, and I think that's an overly pessimistic view on how much help we SHOULD give the less fortunate.

[Burgold]

One of the latest polls put the number or retired people disapproving of this bill at around 63%.

If it passes, don't expect them to support the dem party. Plus you can't promise people something than yank the carpet from under them in order to pay for something you think is neccesary.

That's simply because there has been a propaganda campaign declaring that medicare was going to be raided and completely trashed and no longer serve the seniors.

If you think about it though, it is an interesting act of hypocrisy for seniors to be against universal health care because they are pro medicare. Just goes to show you almost every argument boils down not to good versus evil, or right versus wrong, but us versus them.

[SnyderShrugged]

We already do all three of those things. Food stamps are available to anyone who is hungry in addition to the many local places that make up the slack. Water is available, how could you argue with that? Even here in the desert there are sources of free water all over town. Housing is too. Housing Authorities, Section (whatever it is), and shelters.

All of them are a mixture of private and public. Just like this health care bill will produce. The stuff you get for free is not of sufficient quality/quantity (but it is enough to live) to satisfy most people so they still manage to work up the motivation to go to work.

The fact that routine health care isn't part of that is puzzling. We then say they get help if it's catastrophic when we would have saved ourselves money by treating them earlier. That's just bad business. If we're going to do something, which in essence we have been doing, then let's do it right.

It's too expensive for the private groups to be much help where they can be with lodging and food and that's probably why we have the shortfall IMO.

Of course I see where you were really going with it, and I think that's an overly pessimistic view on how much help we SHOULD give the less fortunate.

But we already do those things regarding health care too. SCHIP, medicare, medicaid, etc. This bill was supposed to expand those programs.

Routine food and home provision is much more important, right?

[The 12th Commandment]

That's simply because there has been a propaganda campaign declaring that medicare was going to be raided and completely trashed and no longer serve the seniors.

If you think about it though, it is an interesting act of hypocrisy for seniors to be against universal health care because they are pro medicare. Just goes to show you almost every argument boils down not to good versus evil, or right versus wrong, but us versus them.

So far as I know, all seniors already have universal, government paid health care. No? Why pay more when you already have everything you're going to get.

[The 12th Commandment]

But we already do those things regarding health care too. SCHIP, medicare, medicaid, etc. This bill was supposed to expand those programs.

Routine food and home provision is much more important, right?

Food certainly, I would argue that being able to go to the doctor, when you need to, is more important than having a permanent shelter. Based only on the ability to survive.

I think that's exactly what the bill is going to do. Universal or single payer were defeated.

[twa]

That's simply because there has been a propaganda campaign declaring that medicare was going to be raided and completely trashed and no longer serve the seniors.

If you think about it though, it is an interesting act of hypocrisy for seniors to be against universal health care because they are pro medicare. Just goes to show you almost every argument boils down not to good versus evil, or right versus wrong, but us versus them.

If they do not cut Medicare the costs rise exponentially...cuts are figured into the "savings" used to justify this travesty of a bill.

You telling me they are lying to us?:evilg:

How is it hypocrisy for those that have paid Medicare taxes their whole working lives and have no CHOICE but to both use and FUND it??

Are you gonna use that same reasoning for any spending in the future?

Have you know forced millions more into hypocrisy in your eyes?:saber:

[Burgold]

You telling me they are lying to us?:evilg:

They're politicians. The hard part is figuring out which part is true! It is sad how often the compromise bill is worse than the original. I think it's because the compromise isn't usually an intellectual battle to improve the sucker, but something far more cynical and destructive.

How is it hypocrisy for those that have paid Medicare taxes their whole working lives and have no CHOICE but to both use and FUND it??

It's the most obvious kind of hypocrisy. In this case, I won't state their hypocrisy is wrong or unfounded, but it is without doubt hypocrisy.

Are you gonna use that same reasoning for any spending in the future?

Have you know forced millions more into hypocrisy in your eyes?:saber:

When appropriate, yes.

[twa]

Food certainly, I would argue that being able to go to the doctor, when you need to, is more important than having a permanent shelter. Based only on the ability to survive.

I think that's exactly what the bill is going to do. Universal or single payer were defeated.

Death panels baby:D

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703514404574588842779569168.html

It's for the greater good

[The 12th Commandment]

Death panels baby:D

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703514404574588842779569168.html

It's for the greater good

Really, they are a wonderful thing. Of course, it's unheard of for politicians to sensationalize a program with a phrase like that. :doh: We do it too, but you guys are really good at it.

Having been through the death of a relative and involvement with our local hospice, where they don't have the energy to deal with misleading symantics, discussions on quality of life, living wills, cost, etc are mandatory. Evil ****s, helping people die with a little more dignity and a little less discomfort!!!

[skinfan133]

If it weren't for my appointment to the Virginia Military Institute, I would be saying some rather disgusting and violent things right now. I'm nearly to the breaking point of toleration for this bull****. We need to vote EVERYONE out of office and blow it up. start over. It's the only solution I can think of