PDA

View Full Version : Obama Excellent approach suggested by Republican Leadership


HonestChieffan
02-09-2010, 09:57 AM
GOP Leadership's Response to Health Care Summit Invite
http://patriotroom.com/article/gop-leadership-s-response-to-health-care-summit-invite

This is excellent. Obama isn't going to get his dog and pony show at the GOP's expense. Start over or take a walk.


Mr. Emanuel:

We welcome President Obama?s announcement of forthcoming bipartisan health care talks. In fact, you may remember that last May, Republicans asked President Obama to hold bipartisan discussions on health care in an attempt to find common ground on health care, but he declined and instead chose to work with only Democrats. Since then, the President has given dozens of speeches on health care reform, operating under the premise that the more the American people learn about his plan, the more they will come to like it. Just the opposite has occurred: a majority of Americans oppose the House and Senate health care bills and want them scrapped so we can start over with a step-by-step approach focused on lowering costs for families and small businesses.
Just as important, scrapping the House and Senate health care bills would help end the uncertainty they are creating for workers and businesses and thus strengthen our shared commitment to focusing on creating jobs. Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward on health care in a bipartisan way, does that mean he will agree to start over so that we can develop a bill that is truly worthy of the support and confidence of the American people? Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said today that the President is ?absolutely not? resetting the legislative process for health care.

If the starting point for this meeting is the job-killing bills the American people have already soundly rejected, Republicans would rightly be reluctant to participate. Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward in a bipartisan way, does that mean he has taken off the table the idea of relying solely on Democratic votes and jamming through health care reform by way of reconciliation? As the President has noted recently, Democrats continue to hold large majorities in the House and Senate, which means they can attempt to pass a health care bill at any time through the reconciliation process.

Eliminating the possibility of reconciliation would represent an important show of good faith to Republicans and the American people.If the President intends to present any kind of legislative proposal at this discussion, will he make it available to members of Congress and the American people at least 72 hours beforehand? Our ability to move forward in a bipartisan way through this discussion rests on openness and transparency. Will the President include in this discussion congressional Democrats who have opposed the House and Senate health care bills? This bipartisan discussion should reflect the bipartisan opposition to both the House bill and the kickbacks and sweetheart deals in the Senate bill. Will the President be inviting officials and lawmakers from the states to participate in this discussion?

As you may know, legislation has been introduced in at least 36 state legislatures, similar to the proposal just passed by the Democratic-controlled Virginia State Senate, providing that no individual may be compelled to purchase health insurance. Additionally, governors of both parties have raised concerns about the additional costs that will be passed along to states under both the House and Senate bills. The President has also mentioned his commitment to have ?experts? participate in health care discussions.

Will the Feb. 25 discussion involve such "experts?" Will those experts include the actuaries at the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), who have determined that the both the House and Senate health care bill raise costs ? just the opposite of their intended effect ? and jeopardize seniors? access to high-quality care by imposing massive Medicare cuts? Will those experts include the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which has stated that the GOP alternative would reduce premiums by up to 10 percent? Also, will Republicans be permitted to invite health care experts to participate? Finally, as you know, this is the first televised White House health care meeting involving the President since last March.

Many health care meetings of the closed-door variety have been held at the White House since then, including one where a sweetheart deal was worked out with union leaders. Will the special interest groups that the Obama Administration has cut deals with be included in this televised discussion? Of course, Americans have been dismayed by the fact that the President has broken his own pledge to hold televised health care talks. We can only hope this televised discussion is the beginning, not the end, of attempting to correct that mistake. Will the President require that any and all future health care discussions, including those held on Capitol Hill, meet this common-sense standard of transparency and openness?

Your answers to these critical questions will help determine whether this will be a truly open, bipartisan discussion or merely an intramural exercise before Democrats attempt to jam through a job-killing health care bill that the American people can?t afford and don?t support. ?Bipartisanship? is not writing proposals of your own behind closed doors, then unveiling them and demanding Republican support. Bipartisan ends require bipartisan means.These questions are also designed to try and make sense of the widening gap between the President?s rhetoric on bipartisanship and the reality. We cannot help but notice that each of the President?s recent bipartisan overtures has been coupled with harsh, misleading partisan attacks. For instance, the President decries Republican ?obstruction? when it was Republicans who first proposed bipartisan health care talks last May.

The President says Republicans are ?sitting on the sidelines? just days after holding up our health care alternative and reading from it word for word. The President has every right to use his bully pulpit as he sees fit, but this is the kind of credibility gap that has the American people so fed up with business as usual in Washington.We look forward to receiving your answers and continuing to discuss ways we can move forward in a bipartisan manner to address the challenges facing the American people.

Sincerely,

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH)

House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA)

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 10:14 AM
This is typical bs. Cantor stated on the record yesterday they wouldn't vote for any bill unless it was the complete Republican bill they proposed.

HonestChieffan
02-09-2010, 10:18 AM
This is typical bs. Cantor stated on the record yesterday they wouldn't vote for any bill unless it was the complete Republican bill they proposed.

Wonder why that seems to not be covered by media.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 10:22 AM
Wonder why that seems to not be covered by media.

use google
After going it alone on health care reform for nearly a year, President Obama has decided he wants to bring Republicans into the conversation. Here’s the problem: unless the President and Speaker Pelosi are willing to scrap their government take over and hit the reset button, there’s not much to talk about.

Republicans believe the status quo is unacceptable, but so is any health reform package that spends money we don’t have or raises taxes on small businesses and working families in a recession. To that point, House Republicans have offered the only plan , that will lower health care costs, which is what the President said was the goal at the start of this debate.

BigRedChief
02-09-2010, 10:28 AM
This is total BS. Drop all your plans. Do all of our plans and we can talk.:rolleyes:

HonestChieffan
02-09-2010, 10:29 AM
That certainly does not say what you alluded to. If its there its well hidden. As you stated Cantor stated on the record...that would indicate somewhere he is quoted? further you said he stated he would "only support the bill republicans proposed"...and that is not what you cut and paste either.

HonestChieffan
02-09-2010, 10:29 AM
This is total BS. Drop all your plans. Do all of our plans and we can talk.:rolleyes:

It does not say that either.

Taco John
02-09-2010, 10:31 AM
This is total BS. Drop all your plans. Do all of our plans and we can talk.:rolleyes:

Yes. Start from scratch. Drop all of you plans. They failed in Massachussetts. The people have spoken. You lost.

Drop your plans and start from scratch.

Yes.

BigRedChief
02-09-2010, 10:33 AM
It does not say that either.Thats what they want. It's posturing politics. They are trying to not come off as obstrutionists while at the same time not give into anything the Dems want to happen.

They have learned their lesson. On the issues and on live TV Obama will own them again and they don't want that to happen.

BigRedChief
02-09-2010, 10:34 AM
Yes. Start from scratch. Drop all of you plans. They failed in Massachussetts. The people have spoken. You lost.

Drop your plans and start from scratch.

Yes.Hey, pay attention. I was against every Dem and Republican proposed healthcare bill. so, drop the I lost BS. jeeezzz:doh!:

petegz28
02-09-2010, 10:35 AM
Hey, pay attention. I was against every Dem and Republican proposed healthcare bill. so, drop the I lost BS. jeeezzz:doh!:

Then you shouldn't be opposed to scraping the plan and starting from scratch.

Taco John
02-09-2010, 10:36 AM
Thats what they want. It's posturing politics. They are trying to not come off as obstrutionists while at the same time not give into anything the Dems want to happen.

They have learned their lesson. On the issues and on live TV Obama will own them again and they don't want that to happen.

Dude, Obama's approval ratings just hit a new low (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll). If Obama owned them, the public at large didn't register it.

Taco John
02-09-2010, 10:37 AM
Hey, pay attention. I was against every Dem and Republican proposed healthcare bill. so, drop the I lost BS. jeeezzz:doh!:

I'm not talking about "you" specifically. I'm talking about those clinging to this plan. That isn't you is it?

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 10:39 AM
That certainly does not say what you alluded to. If its there its well hidden. As you stated Cantor stated on the record...that would indicate somewhere he is quoted? further you said he stated he would "only support the bill republicans proposed"...and that is not what you cut and paste either.

Yeah that is why he said the Republicans have the only plan :rolleyes: Reading between the lines it is our plan or nothing

The CBO has already scored the Rep plan. It will save $61 billion dollars off the deficit and cover 3 million additional people by 2020

The CBO said the Dems plan would save $104 billion off the deficit and cover 36 million additional people.

I am not saying I like the Dem plan but he is full of shit.

HonestChieffan
02-09-2010, 10:45 AM
Dirk, you read between the lines. Thats cool. But dont make up things like "Cantor said on the record"..he didnt.

You wouldnt accept any idea from the republicans if it came with gold bricks for your driveway. Perhaps you are better off in the Sarah Palin wrote on her hand thread.

ROYC75
02-09-2010, 10:50 AM
Does anybody expect the Libs & Dems to come out and say we didn't include the Republicans ?

All the WH & CH does is lie about each other.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 10:53 AM
Dirk, you read between the lines. Thats cool. But dont make up things like "Cantor said on the record"..he didnt.

You wouldnt accept any idea from the republicans if it came with gold bricks for your driveway. Perhaps you are better off in the Sarah Palin wrote on her hand thread.

That is crap hcf I am for tort reform and health insurance across state lines and I have stated that many times.

This is easy hcf let's put this to the test.

If Obama came out today and said we are going to take the Senate Plan and then take the Republican plan and add in all their ideas and if any are conflicting then we will take the Rep idea.

Do you think the Republicans would vote for it? A simple yes or no answer will suffice.

HonestChieffan
02-09-2010, 10:56 AM
That is crap hcf I am for tort reform and health insurance across state lines and I have stated that many times.

This is easy hcf let's put this to the test.

If Obama came out today and said we are going to take the Senate Plan and then take the Republican plan and add in all their ideas and if any are conflicting then we will take the Rep idea.

Do you think the Republicans would vote for it? A simple yes or no answer will suffice.

I would hope not. The senate plan is a piece of shit.

wild1
02-09-2010, 10:59 AM
Yes. Start from scratch. Drop all of you plans. They failed in Massachussetts. The people have spoken. You lost.

Drop your plans and start from scratch.

Yes.

we won, you lost, get over it?

BigRedChief
02-09-2010, 11:00 AM
Yeah that is why he said the Republicans have the only plan :rolleyes: Reading between the lines it is our plan or nothing

The CBO has already scored the Rep plan. It will save $61 billion dollars off the deficit and cover 3 million additional people by 2020

The CBO said the Dems plan would save $104 billion off the deficit and cover 36 million additional people.

I am not saying I like the Dem plan but he is full of shit.
Which sounds better to most people?

The CBO has already scored the Rep plan. It will save $61 billion dollars off the deficit and cover 3 million additional people by 2020

The CBO said the Dems plan would save $104 billion off the deficit and cover 36 million additional people.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 11:01 AM
I would hope not. The senate plan is a piece of shit.

Well there you go I was right.

BTW hcf do the dems have any good ideas on health care that you like?

RINGLEADER
02-09-2010, 11:02 AM
Yet another example of why you don't want politicians involved in things like your health care. Both sides are unqualified to know what's best and both sides will act in their own political self-interests before actually fixing the problems.

This "summit" is a joke PR move from a White House that was arrogant and thought it didn't need to listen to what the public was saying. Despite all his offers to listen to other ideas Obama and Co. are deaf when it comes to anything anyone else proposes because the lust of criteria he demands to be met is impossible to achieve any other way (and if you look at the CBO conclusions they're impossible to sustain even then).

Obama and the Dems STILL think their problem is one of message. I love the fact that Obama us unwilling to listen and has set goals that make it impossible to change course. It makes his eventual downfall on this bill that much more epic.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 11:03 AM
Which sounds better to most people?

The CBO has already scored the Rep plan. It will save $61 billion dollars off the deficit and cover 3 million additional people by 2020

The CBO said the Dems plan would save $104 billion off the deficit and cover 36 million additional people.

This is one of the biggest failures of Obama and I don't even like this bill.

Give them this choice and 70% would pick the latter plan.

BigRedChief
02-09-2010, 11:06 AM
I'm not talking about "you" specifically. I'm talking about those clinging to this plan. That isn't you is it?We debated this for a friggin year. They have been trying to pass health care reform since Teddy Rosevelt. The issues are well known by everyone. I have no interest in seeing Congress gridlocked for another year while we debate and score political points on cable new shows.

The Dems have 59 senate seats. The Republicans have 41. Republicans just saying no to everything, hold up 70 nominees because you want more pork is not what I think most Americans want to see in Washington. They are not equals. There was an election a year ago. The people spoke and they wanted to try the Dems way. They will have a chance to speak again in Novemember.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 11:06 AM
Yet another example of why you don't want politicians involved in things like your health care. Both sides are unqualified to know what's best and both sides will act in their own political self-interests before actually fixing the problems.

This "summit" is a joke PR move from a White House that was arrogant and thought it didn't need to listen to what the public was saying. Despite all his offers to listen to other ideas Obama and Co. are deaf when it comes to anything anyone else proposes because the lust of criteria he demands to be met is impossible to achieve any other way (and if you look at the CBO conclusions they're impossible to sustain even then).

Obama and the Dems STILL think their problem is one of message. I love the fact that Obama us unwilling to listen and has set goals that make it impossible to change course. It makes his eventual downfall on this bill that much more epic.

A large part of it is message. This whole process was a mess and it wasn't explained coherently.

wild1
02-09-2010, 11:08 AM
A large part of it is message. This whole process was a mess and it wasn't explained coherently.

ROFL

How many polls, how many repudiations will it take before people realize that the public does NOT want the government in charge of their health care, period?

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 11:10 AM
ROFL

How many polls, how many repudiations will it take before people realize that the public does NOT want the government in charge of their health care, period?

Yeah that is why overwhelmingly seniors love Medicare.

BigRedChief
02-09-2010, 11:11 AM
Yeah that is why overwhelmingly seniors love Medicare.Social Security...

patteeu
02-09-2010, 11:12 AM
This is typical bs. Cantor stated on the record yesterday they wouldn't vote for any bill unless it was the complete Republican bill they proposed.

use google


That didn't say what you claimed at all. Not even between the lines. OTOH, the letter in the OP says specifically quite the opposite. What could be more fair than scrapping the democrat-only bill that has been soundly rejected by the population and starting over with a blank slate? What could be objectionable about a request for an assurance that the 59 seat majority won't try to ram something through and just use these bipartisan meetings as photo ops to cover for the unipartisan power play? Why would you have a problem with a commitment to the bipartisanship and openness that your candidate promised but then failed to deliver?

This is total BS. Drop all your plans. Do all of our plans and we can talk.:rolleyes:

You should read the OP instead of blindly following dirk's lead.

wild1
02-09-2010, 11:12 AM
Yeah that is why overwhelmingly seniors love Medicare.

Don't let anyone get in your way.. please, continue to throw yourselves off this cliff.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 11:17 AM
That didn't say what you claimed at all. Not even between the lines. OTOH, the letter in the OP says specifically quite the opposite. What could be more fair than scrapping the democrat-only bill that has been soundly rejected by the population and starting over with a blank slate? What could be objectionable about a request for an assurance that the 59 seat majority won't try to ram something through and just use these bipartisan meetings as photo ops to cover for the unipartisan power play? Why would you have a problem with a commitment to the bipartisanship and openness that your candidate promised but then failed to deliver?



You should read the OP instead of blindly following dirk's lead.

I actually have no problem with it as long as there is compromise on both sides. But I know there won't be. Even if the Dems gave everything the Reps had in their bill they wouldn't vote it. You know it and I know it.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 11:18 AM
Don't let anyone get in your way.. please, continue to throw yourselves off this cliff.

Considering most of the people bitching are going to be on Medicare in the next 5-10 years I doubt they will complain too much. Maybe they will pay their own way...yeah right LMAO

wild1
02-09-2010, 11:20 AM
Considering most of the people bitching are going to be on Medicare in the next 5-10 years I doubt they will complain too much. Maybe they will pay their own way...yeah right LMAO

If money has been stolen from them their entire working lives, why wouldn't they at least draw out whatever minimal benefit they might have? A worker may as well recover cents on his dollar instead of nothing at all.

mikey23545
02-09-2010, 11:21 AM
This is total BS. Drop all your plans. Do all of our plans and we can talk.:rolleyes:

Yes, drop all your plans because an overwhelming majority of Americans have spoken out vociferously against it.

Get the f*ck over it, Obamabot.

Stinger
02-09-2010, 11:31 AM
The CBO said the Dems plan would save $104 billion off the deficit and cover 36 million additional people.

Was this before or after the back room deals and the contortionist efforts with the union exemptions?

patteeu
02-09-2010, 11:33 AM
I actually have no problem with it as long as there is compromise on both sides. But I know there won't be. Even if the Dems gave everything the Reps had in their bill they wouldn't vote it. You know it and I know it.

I don't know that at all. In fact, I believe just the opposite. I do know that democrats aren't going to ever let that happen so our positions will never be tested.

The democrats need a health care bill of some type more than Republicans do. That means they should be more willing to compromise. But they won't so they probably won't get a whole lot of bipartisan support for whatever they try to ram through.

BigRedChief
02-09-2010, 11:34 AM
Yes, drop all your plans because an overwhelming majority of Americans have spoken out vociferously against it.

Get the f*ck over it, Obamabot. please think before you post and try to dismiss any input that I may have to the discussion. I'm against the health care reform bills and have been since day 1. But please go ahead with that broad brush you like to paint with.

BigRedChief
02-09-2010, 11:36 AM
You should read the OP instead of blindly following dirk's lead.I read the letter last night online.

Fish
02-09-2010, 11:42 AM
If money has been stolen from them their entire working lives, why wouldn't they at least draw out whatever minimal benefit they might have? A worker may as well recover cents on his dollar instead of nothing at all.

Money has been stolen from them huh?

patteeu
02-09-2010, 11:42 AM
I read the letter last night online.

Then where did you come up with the BS about "do all of our plans and we can talk"? The letter doesn't say anything like that. It says let's start from scratch and make sure the whole process is transparent and open.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 11:45 AM
I don't know that at all. In fact, I believe just the opposite. I do know that democrats aren't going to ever let that happen so our positions will never be tested.

The democrats need a health care bill of some type more than Republicans do. That means they should be more willing to compromise. But they won't so they probably won't get a whole lot of bipartisan support for whatever they try to ram through.

You are naive and live in a fantasy land. I bet in the next bill there will be tort reform and insurance portability and they still won't vote for it.

Royal Fanatic
02-09-2010, 11:46 AM
You are naive and live in a fantasy land. I bet in the next bill there will be tort reform and insurance portability and they still won't vote for it.
If the bill also includes the same shit as the current bill, I would hope they would vote against it.

Chief Faithful
02-09-2010, 11:48 AM
"Bipartisan ends require bipartisan means." :clap:

BucEyedPea
02-09-2010, 11:57 AM
bipartisanship is evil

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 11:59 AM
I am still waiting hcf do you like any dem ideas?

HonestChieffan
02-09-2010, 12:06 PM
Sure. Portability across lines has been on both R and D lists forever. But for you Ill say its Nancy Pelosi's personal idea and I endorse it fully.

It dont get any better than that.

Chief Faithful
02-09-2010, 12:14 PM
bipartisanship is evil

Maybe, but if you are going to use it as a big stick you better be prepared to live by it.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 12:14 PM
Sure. Portability across lines has been on both R and D lists forever. But for you Ill say its Nancy Pelosi's personal idea and I endorse it fully.

It dont get any better than that.

with all due respect I have never once heard or read anywhere that Pelosi was for insurance portability. If you have a link for that I would appreciate it.

It is a Republican idea and one that I support along with meaningful tort reform. Actually I am for alot of what the Republicans support but also know that we have to cover everybody that we can and make sure insurance companies aren't screwing over good honest Americans.

mlyonsd
02-09-2010, 12:28 PM
Actually I am for alot of what the Republicans support but also know that we have to cover everybody that we can and make sure insurance companies aren't screwing over good honest Americans.

If you want to cover everybody either the costs must go up or services must be reduced.

Pick your posion but I won't vote for any elected official that votes for either scenario.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 12:45 PM
If you want to cover everybody either the costs must go up or services must be reduced.

Pick your posion but I won't vote for any elected official that votes for either scenario.

Then what is the point?

Did you just read that Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield made a $3 billion dollar profit and just raised their rates 39%?

We have a problem that is about to get out of control.

patteeu
02-09-2010, 12:47 PM
You are naive and live in a fantasy land. I bet in the next bill there will be tort reform and insurance portability and they still won't vote for it.

If they don't vote for it, it will be because there's a bunch of stuff in it that they don't like. Duh. It's not enough for democrats to just offer a couple of token policy concessions on top of a nightmare of socialist crack designed to get the country hooked on government orchestrated health care.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 01:02 PM
If they don't vote for it, it will be because there's a bunch of stuff in it that they don't like. Duh. It's not enough for democrats to just offer a couple of token policy concessions on top of a nightmare of socialist crack designed to get the country hooked on government orchestrated health care.

There is always going to be something in a bill that either side doesn't like which is the point I am making. It doesn't matter if they got all their ideas put in they would reject it because they don't like any of the Dems ideas.

mlyonsd
02-09-2010, 01:04 PM
Then what is the point?

Did you just read that Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield made a $3 billion dollar profit and just raised their rates 39%?

We have a problem that is about to get out of control.

I don't know, what is the point since the current dem bill version doesn't cover everybody. By your standards it fails.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 01:09 PM
I don't know, what is the point since the current dem bill version doesn't cover everybody. By your standards it fails.

I didn't support the Dem bill but it would cover 36 million out of the 40 million that are uninsured.

Personally I would rather have medicare for all.

patteeu
02-09-2010, 01:09 PM
There is always going to be something in a bill that either side doesn't like which is the point I am making. It doesn't matter if they got all their ideas put in they would reject it because they don't like any of the Dems ideas.

That's ridiculous. The democrats don't have to get every Republican on board to pass a bill, they just need 1. They don't even need all that many to be able to describe the effort as bipartisan. If they were able to attract 10 or 12 of the Republicans, they could have a dominant majority passing bipartisan legislation. You can't tell me that every Republican would oppose the type of make-believe-bill that you're talking about. What you could tell me, if you were being honest with yourself, is that the democrats don't have any intention of generating the kind of bipartisan effort that could attract 12 Republican Senators.

patteeu
02-09-2010, 01:11 PM
I didn't support the Dem bill but it would cover 36 million out of the 40 million that are uninsured.

Personally I would rather have medicare for all.

For people who didn't support the bill, you, BRC, and banyon have all been pretty vocal today about how bad the Republicans who refused to help pass it have been.

mlyonsd
02-09-2010, 01:12 PM
For people who didn't support the bill, you, BRC, and banyon have all been pretty vocal today about how bad the Republicans who refused to help pass it have been.

ROFL

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 01:14 PM
That's ridiculous. The democrats don't have to get every Republican on board to pass a bill, they just need 1. They don't even need all that many to be able to describe the effort as bipartisan. If they were able to attract 10 or 12 of the Republicans, they could have a dominant majority passing bipartisan legislation. You can't tell me that every Republican would oppose the type of make-believe-bill that you're talking about. What you could tell me, if you were being honest with yourself, is that the democrats don't have any intention of generating the kind of bipartisan effort that could attract 12 Republican Senators.

I think you fail to realize it is election year so no I don't think it is ridiculous that they would all not support it. I am also pretty sure that if they gave alot of republican ideas in it alot of progressive Dems would vote against it.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 01:18 PM
For people who didn't support the bill, you, BRC, and banyon have all been pretty vocal today about how bad the Republicans who refused to help pass it have been.

That is a fair point but for me it is because we need to fix health care. What Anthem did is a warning shot across America that premiums are about to explode.

mlyonsd
02-09-2010, 01:23 PM
That is a fair point but for me it is because we need to fix health care. What Anthem did is a warning shot across America that premiums are about to explode.

There is no doubt in my mind if the dems had passed their senate bill you'd be considering it an accomplishment.

BigRedChief
02-09-2010, 01:25 PM
That is a fair point but for me it is because we need to fix health care. What Anthem did is a warning shot across America that premiums are about to explode.This!

Just because we didn't support the senate or Republican bills doesn't mean health care reform isn't needed.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 01:33 PM
There is no doubt in my mind if the dems had passed their senate bill you'd be considering it an accomplishment.

it would depend on how it all played out. If they forced it through reconciliation then I wouldn't.

patteeu
02-09-2010, 01:34 PM
That is a fair point but for me it is because we need to fix health care. What Anthem did is a warning shot across America that premiums are about to explode.

About to? Premiums have been going up faster than the rate of inflation for a while now. Unfortunately, the democrats' didn't have anything in their plan to address this. And at the same time, they were going to explode the deficit.

patteeu
02-09-2010, 01:36 PM
This!

Just because we didn't support the senate or Republican bills doesn't mean health care reform isn't needed.

Why are you blaming the Republicans for the failure of reform? The entire enchilada was in democrats hands and they didn't need the support of a single Republican. Would you blame the child for child abuse?

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 01:41 PM
About to? Premiums have been going up faster than the rate of inflation for a while now. Unfortunately, the democrats' didn't have anything in their plan to address this. And at the same time, they were going to explode the deficit.

Republicans didn't either that is why the CBO scored the Dems plan better.

BigRedChief
02-09-2010, 01:42 PM
Why are you blaming the Republicans for the failure of reform?They get part of the blame because of a failure to negioate in good faith and their obstructionist agenda. But the majority of the blame is definetly on the dems. Thats the problem with big tents, its hard as hell to get everyone to agree on something this large.

patteeu
02-09-2010, 01:47 PM
Republicans didn't either that is why the CBO scored the Dems plan better.

The Republicans had several plans. I'm not sure which one you're talking about or the assumptions used to score it, but I do know that Harry Reid's Senate plan was scored on the basis of a bunch of unrealistic assumptions and subject to several gimmicks in order to allow the democrats to lure suckers like you into thinking it scored well.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 01:51 PM
The Republicans had several plans. I'm not sure which one you're talking about or the assumptions used to score it, but I do know that Harry Reid's Senate plan was scored on the basis of a bunch of unrealistic assumptions and subject to several gimmicks in order to allow the democrats to lure suckers like you into thinking it scored well.

I already posted the score of it earlier in this thread it was the one Boehner released.

So you don't trust the CBO?

patteeu
02-09-2010, 01:51 PM
They get part of the blame because of a failure to negioate in good faith and their obstructionist agenda. But the majority of the blame is definetly on the dems. Thats the problem with big tents, its hard as hell to get everyone to agree on something this large.

You must have been tired when you read the letter last night. You should read it again. Let me draw your attention to one particular part for right now:

In fact, you may remember that last May, Republicans asked President Obama to hold bipartisan discussions on health care in an attempt to find common ground on health care, but he declined and instead chose to work with only Democrats.

and this part:

"Bipartisanship" is not writing proposals of your own behind closed doors, then unveiling them and demanding Republican support. Bipartisan ends require bipartisan means.These questions are also designed to try and make sense of the widening gap between the President?s rhetoric on bipartisanship and the reality. We cannot help but notice that each of the President's recent bipartisan overtures has been coupled with harsh, misleading partisan attacks. For instance, the President decries Republican "obstruction" when it was Republicans who first proposed bipartisan health care talks last May.

mlyonsd
02-09-2010, 01:55 PM
Why are you blaming the Republicans for the failure of reform? The entire enchilada was in democrats hands and they didn't need the support of a single Republican. Would you blame the child for child abuse?

Dirk and BRC are blaming the republicans for not giving them at least one vote, on a bill neither of them supports. Too funny.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 02:01 PM
Dirk and BRC are blaming the republicans for not giving them at least one vote, on a bill neither of them supports. Too funny.

I said in another thread last night the Dems are the ones to blame for not getting health care done because they had the clear majority but they couldn't get out of their own way.

I only complained because Cantor sent this letter and then yesterday said it is his way or no way

patteeu
02-09-2010, 02:02 PM
I already posted the score of it earlier in this thread it was the one Boehner released.

Posting the score doesn't tell me anything about what was scored or how it was scored. Obviously, these factors are of little importance to you.

I still don't know what proposal Boehner released, but as I pointed out previously there were several Republican plans not just one.

So you don't trust the CBO?

I'm not questioning the CBO. Let's say I want to get a dog and I need to convince my wife that we can afford it. I go to our family's accountant and ask him to prepare an analysis to determine the annual cost of ownership of the dog using the following 2 assumptions:

* Assume the dog will only live 15 years, but spread the cost of his dog food out over 30 years.

* Do not include any expenses for immunizations, routine well care and emergency visits to the vet. I'll account for those with deficit spending from the family health budget.

Am I going to get an accurate assessment of the cost of ownership? Will the results of this analysis help me sell the idea of getting a dog to my wife if she doesn't pay any attention to my assumptions?

patteeu
02-09-2010, 02:08 PM
Dirk and BRC are blaming the republicans for not giving them at least one vote, on a bill neither of them supports. Too funny.

Yeah, I bet their Obama pillows are tear-soaked.

http://images4.cafepress.com/product/328973234v2_240x240_Front.jpg

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 02:19 PM
Posting the score doesn't tell me anything about what was scored or how it was scored. Obviously, these factors are of little importance to you.

I still don't know what proposal Boehner released, but as I pointed out previously there were several Republican plans not just one.



I'm not questioning the CBO. Let's say I want to get a dog and I need to convince my wife that we can afford it. I go to our family's accountant and ask him to prepare an analysis to determine the annual cost of ownership of the dog using the following 2 assumptions:

* Assume the dog will only live 15 years, but spread the cost of his dog food out over 30 years.

* Do not include any expenses for immunizations, routine well care and emergency visits to the vet. I'll account for those with deficit spending from the family health budget.

Am I going to get an accurate assessment of the cost of ownership? Will the results of this analysis help me sell the idea of getting a dog to my wife if she doesn't pay any attention to my assumptions?

It is this plan. http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare

CBO:

The GOP plan would cover 3 million uninsured Americans and cut $61 billion from the deficit in 10 years

The Dems plan would cover 36 million uninsured Americans and cut $132* billion dollars in 10 years

* I had originally posted $104 billion but the CBO has revised it since all the amendments

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10868/12-19-Reid_Letter_Managers_Correction_Noted.pdf

patteeu
02-09-2010, 02:27 PM
It is this plan. http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare

CBO:

The GOP plan would cover 3 million uninsured Americans and cut $61 billion from the deficit in 10 years

The Dems plan would cover 36 million uninsured Americans and cut $132* billion dollars in 10 years

* I had originally posted $104 billion but the CBO has revised it since all the amendments

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10868/12-19-Reid_Letter_Managers_Correction_Noted.pdf

You ignored my thought experiment. Is that because you already know about the problem with the CBO scoring of the democrats' bill or is it because you don't want to know about it?

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 02:52 PM
You ignored my thought experiment. Is that because you already know about the problem with the CBO scoring of the democrats' bill or is it because you don't want to know about it?

I assumed they already calculated it all in there otherwise how reliable is the CBO in any of these bills?

HonestChieffan
02-09-2010, 02:55 PM
never has been accurate before now

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 02:57 PM
never has been accurate before now

That is probably true but it is the best we got I think.

patteeu
02-09-2010, 03:11 PM
I assumed they already calculated it all in there otherwise how reliable is the CBO in any of these bills?

No, that's not the case. Only as reliable as the rules by which they operate.

HonestChieffan
02-09-2010, 03:11 PM
so you allow a known bad effort to evaluate 1/6 of the US economy and on faith assume its close enough?....good god

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 03:18 PM
No, that's not the case. Only as reliable as the rules by which they operate.

so you allow a known bad effort to evaluate 1/6 of the US economy and on faith assume its close enough?....good god

The CBO has been doing this since 1974 so I don't know why anyone would complain unless it doesn't fit what they want to hear.

patteeu
02-09-2010, 04:51 PM
The CBO has been doing this since 1974 so I don't know why anyone would complain unless it doesn't fit what they want to hear.

You're exactly what the conmen in Congress count on. Congatulations.

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 05:35 PM
You're exactly what the conmen in Congress count on. Congatulations.

I am just following your lead from the past 6-7 years

patteeu
02-09-2010, 06:09 PM
I am just following your lead from the past 6-7 years

No you aren't. You didn't see me blindly relying on CBO numbers without having at least a basic understanding of what they meant.

How did Harry Reid manage to get his health care bill to avoid expanding the deficit? Did he strip out a deficit-ballooning measure to fix Medicare reimbusement for doctors knowing that Congress will pass the fix separately without regard to it's deficit impact? Did he arrange it so taxes kick in well before the costly "benefits" do in a one time balancing act that won't be there in the years when the program continues past the scoring window? Did he do both of these things and more in order to fool people who either can't or won't bother to look beyond the "reduce the deficit" headlines? What do you think?

dirk digler
02-09-2010, 07:54 PM
I think I must have struck a nerve.