How many elected officials in Congress will reconsider their YES vote when rep

1. 59

   JON EWALLposted 12 years ago

   How many  elected officials in Congress will reconsider their YES  vote when repealing Obamacare ?

   replyreport
2. 65

   TeaPartyCrasherposted 12 years ago

   A better question is what replacement the Kochs, ALEC, etc will propose to the GOP? 
   
   But you keep listening to their voices while they build their "Corporate State".

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      TPC - what is the mental problem you liberal socialist commies have with answering the question posed. Instead you opine about some irrelevancy. You continually demagogue  Koch, but give Soros a pass proves your hypocrisy.

      replyreport
   2. 60

      Writer Davidposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Ah, TPC, what would we do without you?  Typical CIP post by a liberal
      C  Change the subject
      I   Ignore the facts
      P  Personal attacks. 
      I'd say you put all three in a very short post.  Congrats to you.

      replyreport
   3. 84

      peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You guys keep calling liberals commies.  Did you know that Karl Marx was one of the first ones to espouse supply side economics?  Which  the Cons call trickle down Reaganomics. I'm not trying to hi-jack this forum, I'm just putting it out there.

      replyreport
   4. 59

      JON EWALLposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      TPC
      Suggest you watch the debate on c-span on Wed. and Thurs.
      The real thing, in the flesh and uncut or doctored by the media.

      replyreport
   5. 61

      Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      people-I'm just trying to get people to admit their ideology as opposed to always attacking conservatives and capitalists individually without cause. Liberals should argue the strength of their principles instead of Koch's free speech rights.

      replyreport
3. 82

   Attikosposted 12 years ago

   If the vote is held in the house prior to the election, quite a few former "aye" votes will become "nays." No vote will be allowed in the senate before then, so the question does not apply there.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Obamacare is so unpopular that getting demwit congressmen on record in favor of it will make their reelections this November more difficult. That's what this is all about.  It'll be interesting to see if they walk out again to avoid it.

      replyreport
4. 61

   Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years ago

   Hello Jon. Given the fact that democrats voted for Obamacare on the false claim it was not a tax they would be forced to reconsider their vote. AND then there is the issue of cost, that dems cannot run from because they said Obamacare would cost less than a trillion dollars. Unfortunately, the economic assumptions used to score the bill were based on an economy growing and producing jobs like the economic turnaround under Ronald Reagan. Instead Obama has recreated the Hoover turnaround fiasco with Obamacare the center piece of his failure. Unfortunately for the future of America reelecting Obama whilst NOT tearing down Obamacare will lead to another failed administration like that of FDR.
   
   So I don't know how many will reconsider, but there are many dems that will be facing reelection who will have to defend tax increases, which are indefensible when the claim was Obamacare was not tax.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Geez, again the name calling.  If you compare what Koch brothers are worth and what they have given to Super PACs to what Soros is worth,  the Koch brothers could buy and sell Soros in a minute.

      replyreport
   2. 82

      Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Hardly, and according to a WSJ report published this morning the labor unions are outspending the demon Kochs anyway. It's not the retardicans who have the most campaign money this year, it's the demwits. So far, anyway.

      replyreport
   3. 59

      JON EWALLposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      LDM
      The taxes in the bill will filter down to the poor and middle classes,no doubt about it. If you sell an investment Eg.a house, you will pay a 3.8% tax on the gross price to the government.
      15,000 new IRS agents will be hired to enforce the law.

      replyreport
   4. 61

      Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      What do you mean the name calling? If being called a liberal, socialist or commie is so bad then why are those of who are so intent on supporting the ideology? I'm proud of being a conservative and don't blame others for calling you what you are!

      replyreport
   5. 84

      peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Lions Den Media:  You can't be serious.  If you are then I feel very sorry for you. That means you have been brainwashed by the right wing propaganda machine and you don't know or care what the real meaning and definitions of those names are.

      replyreport
   6. 61

      Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      pp - I've been like this since birth, thanks for your concern. You neglected the question. Why do liberals, or socialists or communists avoid the association? I'm a CAPITALIST, no apologies!! You don't like the word commie? What is exactly the issue?

      replyreport
   7. 84

      peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Lions Den Media:  I even feel more sorry for you, if you have been this way since birth! Being a Capitalist and a Communist are two different things. Capitalism is an economic ideology.  Communisim associates one with the Soviet Union.

      replyreport
   8. 61

      Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      peops - Communism is a political ideology that applies to more than the Soviets. But I believe that was the point - capitalists and communists are 2 different ideologies, whereas libs, socialists and commies are similar in nature.

      replyreport
5. 84

   peoplepower73posted 12 years ago

   I think it takes a super-majority in the house to contest a Supreme Court ruling on legislation.  That number is 290, which is 2/3 of the house. So based on that, this is nothing more then throwing proverbial sand in the wind.  I said it the nice way, if you know what I mean.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Congress has no power to overturn a Supreme Court ruling. They're instead talking a bill to repeal PPACA, a measure that would be independent of any ruling, and to which the Court's power of judicial review would not apply.

      replyreport
   2. 84

      peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      But aren't they still throwing sand in the wind, because it would not get through the democratic controlled senate?

      replyreport
   3. 82

      Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, but that's normal for an election year. Obama is doing it with his new old tax extension proposal. All the pols posture for the voters. If your point is the retardicans are doing it, too, not that they can't throw out an SC ruling, then, sure.

      replyreport
   4. 61

      Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Peoplepower - there is no super majority required on a tax issue, it is a simple majority vote.

      replyreport
   5. 84

      peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Attikos: How can a measure that repeals SC legislation be independent of that ruling and not apply to the courts review.? We're taliking circular logic here, unless I'm missing somethng.

      replyreport
   6. 82

      Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The SC rules on the Constitutionality of laws. It did not legislate PPACA, it approved some, threw out some. An act of congress that repeals the rest would not be a new law, it would be the withdrawal of a law, not subject to court review.

      replyreport
   7. 84

      peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Attikos: "Withdrawal of a law" sounds like weasle wording to me. Are you talking about withdrawing the entire ACA law or just some parts of it? In either case it's a change in an existing law and will never make it past the senate.

      replyreport
   8. 82

      Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Let me put it this way, then, PP: congress has the Constitutional authority to repeal any law it has previously adopted. And if you'll bother to read the other posts, you'll see it's already said the senate won't allow a vote this year.

      replyreport
   9. 84

      peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Then isn't this effort an incredible waste of time.  Other than showing the republican base that this can be done, what purpose does it serve. Doesn't congress have bigger fish to fry? Or is it just more political theater?

      replyreport
   10. 82

       Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Yes, just like Obama's tax cut extension ploy. Every pol in Washington is being a pol right now. What I'm trying to do is shed some light on the mistaken belief congress can't legally repeal its own law, which is what you started out saying.

       replyreport
   11. 84

       peoplepower73posted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Attikos: Duh...I get it now.  Sorry, sometime I'm slow on the uptake, but once I learn, it's like a steel trap...where everythng stays inside and nothing gets out.

       replyreport
   12. 59

       JON EWALLposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       92peoplepower73
       Congress makes laws and Congress can vote to  repeal laws in addition to amending laws.The legislation (law) isn't final until the President signs the legislation. Obama has pledged not to sign an appeal of obamacare.

       replyreport
   13. 82

       Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       The only way he'll ever get the chance is if the retardicans keep the house (likely), take the senate (may be), and he wins reelection (a coin flip). Given this year's politics, it's not difficult to imagine that chaotic scenario.

       replyreport
   14. 61

       Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Attikos  - "retardican". I've got the retard part, which I caught during a conversation with a socialist but...My concern is you're name calling Mexicans or Africans.  Thanks, Concerned Capitalist. pp - where's your contempt?

       replyreport
   15. 82

       Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       I balance it with the term "demwit."

       replyreport
   16. 61

       Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Attikos - thank God for that! Wait....can I get banned from a hub forum for saying God? I did get banned for using the terms "obtuse dolt". And who are the banning police? Is there a hotline? I ask because I would never consider banning free speech.

       replyreport
   17. 82

       Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Frankly, I think that were your partner in repartee a dolt, and were he obtuse, you should be free to point it out.

       replyreport
   18. 0

       Larry Wallposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Obamacare is not going to be repealed. It takes a simple majority in both chambers,  but the Senate Democrats are going to still control the Senate an will not vote to repeal. The House approved repeal with 244 votes. Senate will not concur.

       replyreport
   19. 82

       Attikosposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Not this year, at any rate.

       replyreport
   20. 61

       Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       I agree attikos. Apparently one can be an obtuse dolt, but pointing it out is socially unacceptable. To you and Larry, nothing will happen with Obama in office. Congress is expressing voters sentiment. It's About time HC was debated.

       replyreport
6. 60

   Two Minute Reviewposted 12 years ago

   Many of the YES votes in the House did not win re-election in November 2010. Ditto for the Senate, but I agree that the Senate will not even take a vote on the topic. Harry Reid has done an excellent job of shielding his caucus from taking difficult votes, and in a year where 23 Democratic Senators are up for re-election in what is going to be every bit as tough as 2010, he's not about to start taking those votes now. It's safe to say that this law would never pass today in its current form...

   replyreport
   1. 59

      JON EWALLposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      TMR
      The voters need to call their Senators and demand to know how they would vote, aye or nay. Hold their a............ to the fire! They need some inspiration to do their job as pledged before the Nov. election.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Roger that Jon!!!!  Part of the problem is Americans do not fire these guys for incompetence, because people generally think it is the OTHER congressmen that are the problem. But lets be honest - the problem is most members in Congress.

      replyreport
7. 0

   Larry Wallposted 12 years ago

   The law was enacted by Congress. It was upheld by a majority of the Supreme court. Just because one called it a tax instead of a penalty to justify his vote, does not mean any other national health care bill that required all people to have insurance or face a penalty would not be upheld.
   
   You may repeal Obamacare, but you are going to end up with something.
   
   I need some help. When I lost my job, I lost my insurance. I had COBRA for a year. Now all I can by are limited medical indemnity plans. I cannot get regular insurance  because I am a Type II Diabetic, who keeps his blood sugar under control by diet. I have other conditions, but the Diabetes means automatic rejection. I am four years from Medicare. I need some solution. Otherwise, you may end up paying my medical bills.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      JON EWALLposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Larry Wall
      Obamcare, the law, forbids insurance companies from not  selling you insurance for a pre existing condition.I can't imagine what the premi's will be, start looking for a company.Good luck

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Part of the problem is gov laws not allowing portability of ins. Should we spend $4 trillion to fix a 350 billion $ problem?  Your issues are but a small % of the HC issue. Do you overhaul your car engine when the battery is dead?

      replyreport
   3. 0

      Larry Wallposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      My situation was a little different. Our group policy allowed you to convert to a private policy once you were no longer on COBRA. Unfortunately the company that wrote our group policy did not write individual policies in my home state. I am looking.

      replyreport
   4. 61

      Lions Den Mediaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Larry- that's too bad, but there in lies the solution. Your STATE doesn't allow competition. A one page federal bill would permit insurance across state lines. You should be able to go to Idaho to get a policy fitting your needs.

      replyreport