Things that just don’t add up.
“Don’t get sick. If you have insurance, don’t get sick. If you don’t have insurance, don’t get sick. If you’re sick, don’t get sick. Just don’t get sick.”
“The Republican health care plan: don’t get sick,” he said. But, he added,”The Republicans have a back up plan in case you do get sick … This is what the Republicans want you to do. If you get sick America, the Republican health care plan is this: Die quickly!” U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL)
This is how you forge a bi-partisan agreement. This is how you listen to both sides.
And when asked to apologize by the Republicans, he declined.
“In a signal moment in the increasingly fractious debate over reforming the nation’s sprawling health-care system, Senate Finance Committee members rejected two amendments to create a public option on votes of 15 to 8 and 13 to 10.” More: “Despite the setback for advocates of a public option, debate over such a plan is certain to continue. Sens. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) and Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who offered the amendments that were voted down Tuesday, have vowed to keep the issue at the forefront as the debate unfolds.(MSNBC)
The up or down vote on the Public option goes down, but that doesn’t deter them.
Sen. Snowe (R) has proposed a public plan that would go into effect only in states where private companies weren’t offering affordable enough alternatives. She said late Tuesday that she was discussing the so-called “trigger” compromise with committee Democrats and hadn’t decided how to proceed.
Isn’t that the same thing in the end? A Horse of a different color is still a horse!
“Mr. Obama’s public option died a bipartisan death yesterday in the Senate Finance Committee. What’s left is a package of “reforms” that are mere trite extensions of what we’ve been doing for decades. That is, piling up mandates on private insurers and then lying that this somehow isn’t driving up the cost of health insurance; piling up subsidies for health consumption and then lying that this somehow isn’t responsible for runaway health-care spending.”(WSJ)
The truth is not worth anything these days.
As I’ve said it before, it’s not Bi-partisanship. its BY Partisan’s ship.
But this ship will be back.
The Holy Grail of Liberalism will not go down that easily. It is merely a Battle and not the War.
War is Peace (and security).
Freedom is slavery.
In a surprising vote Tuesday, ten Democrats voted to add a public option to the most conservative of the five health insurance reform bills working their way through Congress. That’s just two votes short of passage.
This robust support for the public option — in what most observers consider the most conservative committee in the Senate signals a sea change in Congressional opinion toward the public option.(Huffington Post)
Mind you, what he is disingenuously referring to is the 2nd amendment made by Sen Schumer to try a more watered down version of the same bill that got more votes than the hardcore one.
So they are warriors of the faithful.
“The more the American people hear about the public option, the more they like it,” said Democratic Sen Charles Schumer after the vote.
Never give up. Never Surrender!
“It was the biggest setback to date for liberal Democrats, but did not kill the possibility of a public option being included in final legislation,” Public option supporters will get several more bites at the apple: They can offer more amendments on the Senate floor (assuming, as most observers do, that Harry Reid will not include this element in the chamber’s combined bill). Or they can fight for it during conference negotiations, since the House is still expected to include some form of public plan in its bill.” (LA Times)
Mind you, Sen Rockefeller is also the same one who proposed the Soda Tax on all you fat slobs who drink too much and get fat and unhealthy.
Yes, your elected representatives are listening to you! 🙂
THE TAX and FINES:
“For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase,” Obama said in an interview on ABC’s “This Week” program. “Right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance. Nobody considers that a tax increase.”
St. Petersburg Times Fact Checker:
Patients First, a project of the conservative advocacy group Americans for Prosperity, issued a news release that played up the possibility that people who didn’t buy health coverage could end up in prison.
“Health Care Mandate Will Require Imprisonment and Fines for Americans Who Can’t Afford to Purchase Insurance or Pay Hefty Government Penalties,” and its first sentence referred to “a draconian health care measure under consideration in Congress that would imprison uninsured Americans who fail to pay a penalty for not buying health insurance.”
We were struck by the statement that the bill would “require imprisonment and fines” for nonpayment of the tax. Nothing in the Internal Revenue Code suggests that violators would have to go to jail. It’s simply one of the possible penalties that could be assessed.”
So it could happen. You just object to “will” happen. And you notice they changed the tenant of the statement also from will to would. So they are arguing a point with the wrong text. And then suggest that because they will not be sent to prison, but could be, and it’s one of the options, that the statement is not true.
Gotta love that Orwell.
So it’s true, but not the way you stated it and not the way we re-stated it differently, but it is still true! 🙂
The headline would have been correct if it had said the mandate “could require imprisonment or fines.” In fact, further down, the text of the release reports more accurately that “under the health care bill outline[d] in the Senate Finance Committee, uninsured Americans who fail to pay a stiff penalty for not purchasing insurance would face up to one year in prison or a $25,000 fine.” That part of the release, with its “or,” acknowledges that violators would likely face just one of those penalties. And it’s worth noting that, as with other violations in which people have refused to pay taxes, sending someone to prison is an extreme measure used as a last resort.
Not that there isn’t a Tax, or fines, or other IRS actions. Just not jail, maybe.
To put this in perspective, the IRS audited almost 1.4 million tax returns in 2007. That year, the number of confinement sentences was 2,123, meaning that less than two-tenths of 1 percent of audits resulted in prison time.
And based on past prosecution trends, it’s highly unlikely that someone would be sentenced to prison for a debt as small as $1,900, tax lawyers said.
So that’s why it’s ok for the IRS to come after you and throw you in prison if you don’t have Health Insurance.
It’s not likely to happen. It’s less than 1%. No big deal.
But the actual uninsured in this country is less the 3% of the population. Yet that is a “crisis”.
Initially, the Senate version would have had families above 300 percent of the federal poverty level pay $3,800 a year if they did not have health insurance. Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., later agreed to lower that amount by half, to $1,900. Backers hope that no American actually pays the tax; they want to see people spending those dollars on health insurance instead.
Still, Ensign is among those who balk at the idea. “Some people hold the Constitution pretty high in their lives, and if they believe that this thing is unconstitutional and they then say … ‘I choose not to have health insurance. I’m not going to buy it,'” Ensign said at a markup of the contentious bill. “We could be subjecting those very people … to fines or the interpretation of a judge potentially all the way up even to imprisonment.”
Section 7203 of the Internal Revenue Code, titled, “Willful failure to file return, supply information or pay tax.”
And all the bills say that your Health Insurance would be on your IRS tax Returns.
So it’s a Tax, that isn’t a tax, that could get you imprisoned, but since that’s unlikely, don’t worry about it so much…
Trust us, we are from the government and we are here to help you! 🙂
DOING IT FOR THE GOOD OF ALL AMERICANS: (from the Las Vegas Sun)
Reid issued an announcement publicly showing that he is using his position to protect Nevada.
“I spoke to the chair of the Finance Committee and he assured me that this bill will be improved for Nevada before he takes it to the committee for final mark-up next week,” Reid said in a statement released this week. “Let me be very clear, I will not bring a health insurance reform bill to the Senate floor that is not good for Nevada.”
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid secured a deal today that would give Nevada full, 100 percent funding in the Senate health care bill for an initial expansion of Medicaid.
The deal would give Nevada full funding for the first five years of the program — an effort to ease concerns that Nevada would be unable to afford the federally-mandated expansion of care for the poor.
So if this is so “neutral” and so wonderful why is the Senate Majority racing to have his state and his state alone “protected” from the effects of the bill for the first five years??
Under the health care bills before Congress, state Medicaid programs, which now primarily cover low-income children, parents, seniors and people with disabilities, would be expanded to include a new segment of the population — poor, childless adults.
The group makes up 21 percent of the uninsured nationwide, and a slightly larger share in Nevada. Many of them are poor, which the government defines as individuals making less than $14,400 a year.
With nearly 470,000 uninsured in Nevada and a soaring jobless rate adding to those ranks, uninsured, childless adults are a vast group. The state won’t hazard a guess at the number.
Under the legislation, the federal government would help states pay to cover them, but the states would have to chip in.
In Nevada, the money would come from the state’s sagging general fund.
One Washington estimate is that Nevada’s current $800 million Medicaid bill would grow by 5 percent, about $40 million annually.
But it won’t add the the deficit if we are all in the same single-payer system. Trust Us!
Assemblywoman Sheila Leslie, D-Reno, an early supporter of President Barack Obama and one of the state’s most liberal legislators, understands the state’s dilemma.
“One of the best ways to attack the high percentage of uninsured is to increase the number of eligible participants on Medicaid,” Leslie said. “But even if the state has to pay 10 percent of the cost, it’s going to be very difficult. We have no money.”
And the other motive:
Now Mr. Baucus has modified the bill to spare Nevada and three other states, and Mr. Reid, who faces a potentially difficult race for re-election next year, is taking credit for getting a “major increase” in federal money for his state. (NY Times)
Trust me, I’m from the government and we want to help you!
Mr. Baucus revised his bill to give extra help to certain “high-need states.” The states were not named in the bill. But only four states meet the criteria: Michigan, Nevada, Oregon and Rhode Island.
The changes came at the expense of other states, including California, Florida and Illinois, which would see significant increases in state Medicaid spending under the new formula.
But they want to help all Americans!
Trust Us, we know what’s good for you!
All the major health care bills moving through Congress would expand Medicaid, adding perhaps 11 million people to the rolls, the Congressional Budget Office says.
The Democratic staff of the Finance Committee estimates that, under existing law, state spending on Medicaid will total $1.7 trillion from 2013 to 2019. That figure could increase by $33 billion under Mr. Baucus’s bill. But when the new costs are combined with savings elsewhere in the bill, Democrats say, state spending would increase by only $22 billion, or 1.3 percent, over the levels now projected.
- Won’t add a dime to the deficit and is paid for upfront.
- Requires additional cuts if savings are not realized.
So the costs will go up, except for Nevada, but it won’t add anything to the deficit having the government paying for it.
Our Big Brother would never lie, right?
“In order to save our children from a future of debt, we will also end the tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% of Americans. But let me perfectly clear, because I know you’ll hear the same old claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people: if your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.” State of The Union Speech.
So what are we left with:
“Senator Reid should know that this legislation is not only bad for Nevada, but it is bad for the rest of the United States,” Representative Nathan Deal of Georgia said.
The Finance Committee has rejected several Republican amendments that would have blocked the expansion of Medicaid if it was found to impose additional costs on states.
The Finance Committe has also rejected amendments to make Congress take the same deal that they want us to have. They have voted down amendments banning illegal immigrants specifically.
They have voted down amendments to ban federal funding of abortions.
Bunning Open Records Amendment: would have required the full language and full price tag to be available on the Internet for three days before Congress votes. (That’s your “transparency” folks!)
Hatch Medicare Advantage (MA) Amendment: would have suspended MA provisions if the CBO finds that (contrary to the President’s promise) seniors are going to lose coverage or benefits.
Kyl Anti-Gag Order Amendment: would have allowed MA insurers to inform seniors of their likely loss of benefits.
Ensign/Cornyn/Kyl Malpractice Lawsuit Amendments: would have provided relief from lawsuits.
Update: oct 1st:
The Republicans proposed a simple amendment, “No tax increases on anyone making less than $250,000” just like the President promised.
Sen Baucus said it “wasn’t a serious amendment” and the Democrats voted it down.
But don’t worry, it’s for your own good and it’s “fair” and “honest” and “open” to debate.
And you’ll love the final product, I guarantee it! 🙂
And we still have Global Warming to deal with you evil human scum!
And Amnesty for all those poor unfortunate new poor Democrats…I mean Illegal Aliens.
We are from the government and we are here to protect and serve.