samsmart
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2009
- Messages
- 10,315
- Reaction score
- 6,470
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Ask all 435 members of the House, since they're the ones who do so.
How can you amend something when you don't know what is in it ??????
Pelosi was Speaker for 4 years...during that time did she attempt to reform the rules?
I don't know.
But no Republican Speaker reformed it before her, and, as far as I know, Boehner hasn't reformed it after her.
On the first day of their majority in the House, the Republicans promised to pass eight major reforms:
require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress;
select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse;
cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;
limit the terms of all committee chairs;
ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;
require committee meetings to be open to the public;
require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;
guarantee an honest accounting of the Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.
Contract with America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ask all 435 members of the House, since they're the ones who do so.
You mean, states don't get to pull a Calhoun anytime they wish, simply because they don't like the law?
Jumping Christ!
Illegal immigration for those under 30, with Obama's dreamy executive order. Congress made the law, Obama decided not to comply. Hmm...
Several bad things:
1) Sets a precedent that a citizen choosing NOT to buy a private good/service is a federally taxable "income" event. If having private medical care insurance is good, why not mandate a private alarm/secirity service with video too? Or mandate buying a car getting 55+ mpg?
2) Makes "free" stuff be covered (from 1st dollar) by all medical care "insurance", thus raising the cost for all that do not use that "free" stuff. Imagine the increase in your auto insurance premiums if the gov't madated that it cover annual "free" tune-ups and oil changes.
3) If the federal gov't can now simply mandate that the states implement (at state or third party cost) anything that they think is good then the state has no power at all.
Residents of states that refuse to set up health insurance exchanges under Obamacare are set to be hit with higher premiums under new rules announced by the Health and Human Services Department.
Insurance companies will be charged 3.5 percent of any premiums they sell through the federal exchanges, the department announced Friday.
And insurers are likely to pass that surcharge on to clients, leaading to higher premiums.
The only states to be affected are those that refuse to set up their own exchanges because of opposition to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. They are almost certain to be those under Republican control. In those states, HHS will set up the exchanges.
Read more: Obama Slaps States That Refuse to Comply With Obamacare
I can suggest not to buy healthcare in an exchange.
Another wealth transfer from producers to the recipients. The left is defunding the right...hopefully soon they will run out of other peoples money.
What part of not knowing what was in it, isn't clear?
All other bills, they know what is in the bill before it is passed.... not in the PPACA.
So, I ask again, how can you amend a bill if you don't know what's in it in the first place?
Robert Creamer is the husband of Democrat Rep. Jan Schakowsky. He formerly served as … a lobbyist for George Soros’s Open Society Institute. Today Creamer heads the Strategic Consulting Group, a political consultancy whose list of clients includes ACORN and the Service Employees International Union….
Pursuant to an FBI investigation, Creamer in 2006 was indicted for bank fraud and tax evasion…. He ultimately was sentenced to five months in federal prison plus eleven months of house arrest….
While incarcerated, Creamer wrote a 628-page political manual titled Stand Up Straight! How Progressives Can Win (published in 2007). In the Acknowledgements section of the book, Creamer stated that his political views had been deeply influenced by “the legendary community organizer” Saul Alinsky.
Stand Up Straight! advanced the notion that the Democratic Party could win a permanent majority in Congress by doing the following:
passing a national health care bill, thereby turning more people into wards of an ever-expanding government, and of the party that works to grow government; and
giving amnesty to all illegal immigrants, thereby creating, virtually overnight, a large new constituency of Democratic voters….
“To win,” added Creamer, “we must not just generate understanding, but emotion—fear, revulsion, anger, disgust.” …
On November 24, 2009, Creamer attended a White House state dinner — along with high-level Obama advisors like Andrew Stern and David Axelrod – despite the fact that ex-convicts are usually barred from such events.
The Man Who Wrote the Blueprint for Obamacare from His Prison Cell | NewsReal Blog
Wait I thought if you liked your health insurance plan you can keep it?
You mean Obama LIED? Say it ain't so
The bill was written long before she said those words.... this we know...This was purposeful, Since Pelosi changed the rules, and congress didn't write the bill....
This group of progressives are criminally diabolical.
So, you mean it resembles income taxes? Import duties? Cigarette Tax Stamps? 9 million other laws?
I didn't say it was good. It just said it is what it is - the new reality in the new century. You can't breed hundreds of millions of people without creating more governing. The frontier era has passed - not just here but all over the world.
Illegal immigration for those under 30, with Obama's dreamy executive order. Congress made the law, Obama decided not to comply. Hmm...
Nonsense. You have given no examples of other "modern" legislation that does any of the three things that I mentioned, related to the PPACA law. Medicaid comes close, but that at least has federal matching funding, unlike the subject of this post - a federal law attempting to "punish" a state for exercising an "option". Remember that the SCOTUS ruled that "punishing" states for not implementing the state exchanges "option", by withholding that state's Medicaid funds, was unconstitutional. Obama seems to think that passing this "punishment" (3.5% premium fee) down to the state's insurance carriers, who will simply pass it on to that state's residents, is a slick end run around that SCOTUS ruling. Yes he did!
Well, yes he did. He's pretty clever and determined. The states would be wise to give in instead of wasting money fighting this.
I think income tax was an excellent example. Your failure to acknowledge my genius has me perplexed...:roll:...utterly perplexed Sir.
How is FIT applied differently depending on state law? Are you refering to the possible (optional) itemized deductions of state income/sales taxes?
Just its very presence (FIT) is and has been argued since 1913. It has many exemptions and penalties. Nobody likes it very much.
See the similarities?
We're just going to have to wait and see how it (Obamacare) sorts itself out. If it's as hideous as you might imagine, then someone else will be elected. Apparently, for now, a majority has accepted it.
After the Supreme Court ruling that upheld most of his health care law, President Obama claimed that the decision was a “victory for people all over the country.” However, public opinion polls that show that a majority of Americans don’t want Obamacare.
RealClearPolitics has compiled polling data since the bill was passed in March 2010, and the numbers are telling. The average of all polling from March 10, 2012, to August 5, 2012, shows support for repeal of Obamacare at 49.8 percent, with 42.2 percent opposed.
The public’s attitude toward Obamacare has remained consistent over time. A CNN/Opinion Research poll conducted in the days leading up to the bill’s signing showed that a majority of the people, 59 percent, opposed the legislation.
Over a year later, Americans’ opinion didn’t change. A Rasmussen poll taken less than three weeks before the 2010 midterm elections showed a near-record 61 percent supporting a full repeal of Obamacare. The American people reiterated their disdain for the law in the voting booth, purging Congress of many of the Members who voted in favor of Obamacare.
The American People Want Obamacare Repealed
Acceptance and support are two different things....
It can only get worse as the beast is revealed slowly over the next year or so....
People are going to hate it once they really need their health insurance IMHO. To me, this is the healthcare equivalent of Don't Ask, Don't Tell--some half-hearted effort to check a box for history books. IMHO, we will probably end up rolling back to private insurance with a public option instead of publicly mandated private insurance.
Give me an example of one that isn't ancient or obscure.
I view PPACA as the beginning of the end for private medical care insurance. Insurance is for the rare, unexpected and expensive events in life, not routine maintanence and normal day to day expenses. Imagine your auto insurance premium cost if the gov't mandated that it cover "free" annual tune-ups, oil changes and worn tire replacement.
Insurance is also intended to be actuarially based, the higher the risk the higher the premium. PPACA mandates ignoring all health risk factors except smoking and age, making those that are obese suddenly seem "normal". That is like mandating that auto insurance ignore all driving records and vehicle costs, or homeowners insurance ignore the purchase price of the dwelling and its condidtion.
Just its very presence (FIT) is and has been argued since 1913. It has many exemptions and penalties. Nobody likes it very much.
See the similarities?
We're just going to have to wait and see how it (Obamacare) sorts itself out. If it's as hideous as you might imagine, then someone else will be elected. Apparently, for now, a majority has accepted it.
So when a federal law gets old it no longer needs enforced, but when its new it has to be enforced? I don't think it works that way.
I seem to recall something like that as well...but see this is how authoritarian progressives get what they want whether you like it or not..When you find their loophole, as in the exchanges, they smack you with a heavy handed regulation, if that doesn't work because the court says no, then ignore the court. Welcome to the United State of Chicago.
I view PPACA as the beginning of the end for private medical care insurance. Insurance is for the rare, unexpected and expensive events in life, not routine maintanence and normal day to day expenses. Imagine your auto insurance premium cost if the gov't mandated that it cover "free" annual tune-ups, oil changes and worn tire replacement.
Insurance is also intended to be actuarially based, the higher the risk the higher the premium. PPACA mandates ignoring all health risk factors except smoking and age, making those that are obese suddenly seem "normal". That is like mandating that auto insurance ignore all driving records and vehicle costs, or homeowners insurance ignore the purchase price of the dwelling and its condidtion.
You entirely miss that the point of the AHC act is to get everyone insured. Everyone gets sick and everyone needs to have healthcare insured or not. Acutarial tables do not insure people they deny insurance to those that need it most. That is the opposite of what we need. Why waste million of dollars with elaborate claims denial operations when those people will most likely get treated anyway by Medicaid or othe rGovt. programs? It is just moving the costs around and doesn't really save on health care costs at all
The fact that this is acomplished quite well in other western nations has also gone right over your head. Why is the United Sates so medically challenged that we can't care for our people? I think we can and will.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?