Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The funny thing .... when you look at the GOP proposal for health care (as posted on her by poster Janelle) it is identical to Obamacare but without the mandatory insurance. So, instead of all the grandstanding, why don't they just try to amend it?
Sorry for the off topic but that PBS articel has me going, on top of what I already posted that was not the question, it was 1 of four possible answers for the following question:
Quote:
HC14a. What would you prefer Congress do with the new health care law:
Leave it as is 19%
Change it so that it does MORE to change the health care system 43%
Change it so that it does LESS to change the health care system 10%
Repeal it completely 26%
Don’t know 2%
You're playing with words there--it all depends on how the general public decides to view it, and who makes the best argument in the press.
Exactly. Actually the Newt congress did not shut down the gov't. Clinton did by not signinng the bill that Congress passed. But, the ever loving anti anything republican MSM sold it to the American peopls as if Newt did it.
Here's the deal. The NEW R plan for health care reform is basically the one the democrats passed, but without the mandate. For the record, the plan, including the mandate in the current HCR bill, was developed by the Heritage Foundation in the 90's as a free market alternative to what was considered the more "socialist" plan proposed by the Clinton administration. The R's are now arguing that their own proposal--the mandate--is unconstitutional, but lower court judges are split along partisan lines on it, and the SC isn't anywhere close to taking the case yet. The tricky part is that the R's and the Heritage Foundation argued for the mandate in the 90's because they said it was the only way to allow insurers to pick up people with pre-existing conditions--it broadened the risk pool. Without the mandate, their own bill doesn't work.
Now, they want to cut funding to a program that's pretty much exactly like the one they're going to propose themselves, and one they've strongly supported in the past, even though the Dem's have repeatedly said they'd work with the R's on bipartisan revisions.
Not only that, but people LIKE health care reform. You can argue with the polling, but poll after poll shows that most people want changes made--not repeal--and of those who want repeal, they want something that goes even farther, like single payer.
How do you think this is going to play out for the R's in the press? Why would Obama sign the budget to hold back funding from a program that the republicans are basically STILL proposing themselves?
Exactly. Actually the Newt congress did not shut down the gov't. Clinton did by not signinng the bill that Congress passed. But, the ever loving anti anything republican MSM sold it to the American peopls as if Newt did it.
Actually, Newt and Bob Dole made some really dumb comments about being "snubbed" by Clinton when they had to sit at the back of airforce one, and that they were essentially going to show Clinton a thing or two. They came off as petty, the public blamed them for the shut down, and the R's lost big time in 96 because of it, and continued to lose seats in the House and Senate until 2000.
If the R health care plan they're proposing now is pretty much exactly the same as the HCR bill they want to defund, don't you think the Dem's will be able to make the same case--that defunding it is a petty partisan political move? Why SHOULD Obama sign it. That's a dangerous game for the R's
Take one: Repeal. Take two: Defund.
That’s the GOP strategy for attacking President Barack Obama’s health care law.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia Tuesday predicted that the House, as part of a government-wide spending bill, will approve an amendment next week banning use of the bill’s funds for implementing the landmark 2010 health care law.
The spending bill, which is needed to fund the government for the remaining seven months of the fiscal year, is being drafted by the House Appropriations Committee and is not expected to include the health-law funding ban at first.
Exactly. Actually the Newt congress did not shut down the gov't. Clinton did by not signinng the bill that Congress passed. But, the ever loving anti anything republican MSM sold it to the American peopls as if Newt did it.
That is because there was no FOX News back then to tell the "other side" of the story. The media sided with Clinton and so the country blamed Newt. That won't happen this time. There are too many alternative media outlets to tell both sides.
It really doesn't matter since Obama has made it clear that you do not have to have public support before passing bills or even have read them. Elections have consequences he said.You a;lso can just not allow any debate also or really limit it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
