Coakley vs. Brown

[Ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by ADqtPiMel

My sense is that the House will pass the Senate bill as it is, then simultaneously bring up a corrections bill that would incorporate deals made in negotiations over the last week. The corrections bill could be passed through reconciliation, which requires only 51 votes in the Senate, or even under regular order, assuming Dem leaders find the votes.

I don't believe they can muster the number of votes in the house for this. There is just too much in the Senate bill that is a problem for some of the House Dems. For example, the "blue dogs" will not abide without the Stupak amendment and the Dems who are beholding to labor will be in a very tight box with the tax on "cadillac plans". Beside all this, I also think it would be political suicide for the Dems. They probably know this as well. Maybe they will decide to go out with a blaze of glory though. Stranger things have happened. Witness the election last night.

[ADqtPiMel]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

I don't believe they can muster the number of votes in the house for this. There is just too much in the Senate bill that is a problem for some of the House Dems. For example, the "blue dogs" will not abide without the Stupak amendment and the Dems who are beholding to labor will be in a very tight box with the tax on "cadillac plans". Beside all this, I also think it would be political suicide for the Dems. They probably know this as well. Maybe they will decide to go out with a blaze of glory though. Stranger things have happened. Witness the election last night.

I disagree. Democrats are already saddled with the political fallout, whether the bill passes or not, and it’s better for them to have a bill to defend that has tangible benefits than try to explain why they voted for something and then walked away. There's no incentive whatsoever for any Republican to vote for the bill, so they certainly won't start over unless there's absolutely no other way.

Dems have a large enough margin in the House to get a simple majority on the Senate bill. The party leaders will be sure to make the caucus members aware of the consequences of letting the main aspect of Obama's platform fail. I've seen this happen over and over in the House, and the rank and file always end up falling in line. I could be wrong, but my experience says they can do it.

[Ghostwriter]

Originally Posted by ADqtPiMel

I disagree. Democrats are already saddled with the political fallout, whether the bill passes or not, and it’s better for them to have a bill to defend that has tangible benefits than try to explain why they voted for something and then walked away. There's no incentive whatsoever for any Republican to vote for the bill, so they certainly won't start over unless there's absolutely no other way.

Dems have a large enough margin in the House to get a simple majority on the Senate bill. The party leaders will be sure to make the caucus members aware of the consequences of letting the main aspect of Obama's platform fail. I've seen this happen over and over in the House, and the rank and file always end up falling in line. I could be wrong, but my experience says they can do it.

New info from Speaker Pelosi:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...-health-house/

I understand that this doesn't mean the Senate bill will not be brought up before the House but it certainly doesn't look plausible at this time.

[ADqtPiMel]

Originally Posted by Ghostwriter

New info from Speaker Pelosi:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...-health-house/

I understand that this doesn't mean the Senate bill will not be brought up before the House but it certainly doesn't look plausible at this time.

Points to you on this one I think that they will step back for a while and work on other priorities and then pick health care back up when they've negotiated a way forward...which I still think will involve the House passing the Senate bill. But I honestly have no idea what will happen...just extrapolating based on my experience watching these kind of situations.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by bignasty

Obamacare is doomed.

If Dems want health care they are going to have to get jobs like the rest of the planet. No free health care for all your illegitimate kids.

Hey I hate to break it to you, but quite a few democracies have some kind of universal health care or stricter health care regulation then we have. And of course all democrats in the USA are black, unemployed with a bunch of illegitimate kids.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by bignasty

How many of those countries have 40 million illegals and another 30 million legals that have no interest in working?

Do a little research. These socialist democracies have taken in a lot of foreign nationals including muslims fleeing persecution from regimes in their own countries. Have you been reading stories about the Dutch voting to outlaw minarets? How about the French having a little issue with fire bombings of their cars in Paris a couple years ago? We are not the only country that has a large number of immigrants looking for a better life in a richer, industrialized country. No, they aren't sharing a large border with one of these countries, but they are also much smaller countries, and they do provide healthcare and benefits to these people. I am very good friends with a Swedish couple who are often surprised at attitudes in this country, though, they do admit that a homogenous population like Sweden has experienced extensive growing pains from the number of immigrants they've accepted over the past 20 years.

BTW...neither of the plans passed by Congress would cover illegal immigrants. Even now, as Psi U stated, legal or illegal, anyone with or without money can receive care at an ER no questions asked. We are NOT allowed to refuse care. If the patient cannot pay, the tax payers are ALREADY paying for this care.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by bignasty

How many of those countries have 40 million illegals and another 30 million legals that have no interest in working?

What does this have to do with the inherent stupidity of a system based on employers paying for health care?

I mean, a huge number of those illegals HAVE JOBS . . .

[moe.ron]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

What does this have to do with the inherent stupidity of a system based on employers paying for health care?

I mean, a huge number of those illegals HAVE JOBS . . .

Why do you even bother?

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by bignasty

Obamacare is doomed.

If Dems want health care they are going to have to get jobs like the rest of the planet. No free health care for all your illegitimate kids.

Oh yeah...the WHOLE PLANET gets their health insurance through their jobs...that's a strictly American strategy, and with our recent foray into the fun and games of a recession with record unemployment, we see how well that strategy works.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

I think he was referring to non-emergency medical treatments. I highly doubt as a non citizen I can walk into a hospital in London or Paris and get chemo or a root canal.

Still not necessarily true, though. Spain is currently having quite a problem with "medical tourism" -- people who come from elsewhere in the European Union (like Scandinavia) who'd rather have their surgeries in Spain and their recouperation on the Mediteranian.

Originally Posted by bignasty

The problem with many Dems is they spend their whole lives on welfare and they have no interest in working.

It's just amazing how simplistic your thought process is -- no matter what username you use.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

It's just amazing how simplistic your thought process is -- no matter what username you use.

The funny thing is that he/she is apparently a supporter of unions (judging from previous posts), and doesn't seem to get how that union support doesn't square with his/her other positions.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Still not necessarily true, though. Spain is currently having quite a problem with "medical tourism" -- people who come from elsewhere in the European Union (like Scandinavia) who'd rather have their surgeries in Spain and their recouperation on the Mediteranian.

Are you saying that the Spanish are looking at the medical care of non citizens as a "problem"?

There's a few countries in South/Central America that promote "medical tourism" as well as here in U.S. for those individuals who are fortunate enough to pay out of pocket for their treatment. It is NOT FREE. Canada sends their citizens to hospitals in the U.S. for certain surgeries, but the Canadian government PAYS the U.S. hospital directly. I'd like to see something that states that these Spanish hospitals receive absolutely nothing from the Scandinavian Government or the individuals that they treat.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by bignasty

That is not what I said. Some people get health care through their employer. Some might buy their own. Either way you need to work.

The problem with many Dems is they spend their whole lives on welfare and they have no interest in working.

How come Obama doesn't simply address the cost of healthcare? The cost is the real issue. The Obama supporters who don't work don't want lower costs. They want it for free.

PS. How is taxing my cadillac plan going to lower my costs?

Don't just blame the Democrats for not fixing the cost issue. That is a problem that both the Republicans and Democrats can share completely. Neither have given any hint of tackling that issue. Neither will take on the insurance companies. If you really want to take on cost, you actually do have to ration. You can't let people with no medical education come in and demand that they get a CT just because they want one and actually get it. You have to actually look at the cost/benefit analysis and decide should we really be dialyzing the alzheimer patient who hasn't spoken in 5 years and doesn't recognize anyone in her family at a cost of $999 a week. (Yes, I actually took care of this patient.) No one wants to look at these issues because they are difficult issues that don't make for pretty sound bites and don't get votes come election time. And you can't leave it at "it should be the physicians decision" because MANY physicians will order anything their patient asks for or anything they think will keep them from getting sued by their patient, neither of which decreases the cost of medicine. In the end, no one REALLY wants to decrease the cost of medicine, they REALLY want everything done without question without really having to pay for it.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by shimano

Wrong. The problem is the Democrats. Obama hit the nail on the head with his speech to the DNC.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/01/opinion/01gates.html?hp






The problem with Obama is the lack of accountability. Obama tells the Dems what it takes to be successful and then when they don't do it he wants to blame the system.

It's really easy to point your finger at the poor as the source of all the problems in the health care system, but fixing cost opens a whole can of worms that no one wants to deal with. It's a nice little rallying cry for people who want to oppose the current plan, but no one will ever actually get behind a plan that will actually FIX runaway costs. Do YOU know how to fix the cost problem in healthcare? I doubt it....all you know is you want your healthcare no questions asked.

[dukemama]

Originally Posted by bignasty

Obamacare is doomed.

If Dems want health care they are going to have to get jobs like the rest of the planet. No free health care for all your illegitimate kids.

You're an idiot. Shut up. Just. shut. up.