HOUSE PASSES HEALTH CARE REFORM

  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Nov 08, 2009 4:22 AM GMT
    POLITICO Breaking News:
    -----------------------------------------------------

    The House passed the $1.2 trillion health care plan by a 220 to 215 vote. Thirty-nine Democrats voted against it, as did every Republican except for Joseph Cao of Louisiana.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 4:45 AM GMT

    Congrats so far!

    We were looking at this a few minutes ago

    "In addition to this approved amount, the FY2010 budget shows a $130 billion request for more war spending. This would bring total war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan to more than $1 trillion. When all FY2010 war-related amounts are approved, we will adjust the counter so that it reaches the new total at the end of FY2010."


    from http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

    It seems better, to us, to spend more on US citizens than on wars.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 5:11 AM GMT
    It was a long hard fought battle and now it falls on the senate to follow through, but I believe this passing will now put even more pressure on the Senate to come through.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 3:08 PM GMT
    Is there a public option/?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 3:49 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    HndsmKansan saidPOLITICO Breaking News:
    -----------------------------------------------------

    The House passed the $1.2 trillion health care plan by a 220 to 215 vote. Thirty-nine Democrats voted against it, as did every Republican except for Joseph Cao of Louisiana.



    How did it get all the way up to $1.2T when just a year ago all the Democrats were floating numbers in the $700-$800B range?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>How did the bush/cheney war Iraq go from an estimated 600 billion, several month effort to an estimated nearly 3 trillion (when long term servicemen health costs from injuries are added in as they should be) So tell me, where is our money better spent? chasing non existent WMD's or on our own citizens? Its a no brainer !!!
  • bottomline

    Posts: 331

    Nov 08, 2009 4:31 PM GMT
    Guys this is a good day; but its not over yet, lets not loose focus.
    Please go to the presidents site and contribute to make this a complete reality.
    https://donate.barackobama.com/History

  • bottomline

    Posts: 331

    Nov 08, 2009 4:32 PM GMT
    Caslon12000 saidIs there a public option/?

    yes
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 5:18 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    realifedad said
    southbeach1500 saidHow did it get all the way up to $1.2T when just a year ago all the Democrats were floating numbers in the $700-$800B range?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>How did the bush/cheney war Iraq go from an estimated 600 billion, several month effort to an estimated nearly 3 trillion (when long term servicemen health costs from injuries are added in as they should be) So tell me, where is our money better spent? chasing non existent WMD's or on our own citizens?


    So you don't know how the price tag almost doubled over the past year, and you are upset that I even asked the question, so you had to ask another question that has nothing to do with the health care bill, correct?


    Actually they're quite related. You're complaining about government waste, correct?

    The wars in the middle east have been extremely wasteful for some time now, from the amount spent funding them to the loss of human life on both sides.

    Of the two wars only one is possible to complete the objectives of. Iraq is impossible to have a 'mission complete' status on, since we went there for WMD's... and there were never WMD's.

    The cost of the Iraq war alone has surpassed the amount requested for health care reform (which, if you're paying attention, will recoup the costs over the next 10 years... the same cannot be said of the Middle Eastern wars).

    Learn to argue properly and take into consideration all aspects, please and thank you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 5:24 PM GMT
    Gwg Trunks ---- there is absolutely no way I could have responded as well as you did !!! your's was perfect !!! thanks !!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 5:29 PM GMT
    lol, this health care reform passing was all over the Canadian news last night.
  • Menergy_1

    Posts: 737

    Nov 08, 2009 6:15 PM GMT
    Yes, wasn't this just $850 billion a week or two ago? Now it's $1.2 trillion over 10 years? What happened to the original CBO estimated cost - did additional new features get added to drive the price up?

    Note I'm asking only about the cost level and reasons, not judging it (to avoid people starting to use the war costs arguments again....)
  • Menergy_1

    Posts: 737

    Nov 08, 2009 6:18 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    AbFab1 saidYes, wasn't this just $850 billion a week or two ago? Now it's $1.2 trillion over 10 years? What happened to the original CBO estimated cost - did additional new features get added to drive the price up?

    Note I'm asking only about the cost level and reasons, not judging it (to avoid people starting to use the war costs arguments again....)


    Good luck getting a straight response... well, maybe you will because you are not hated on here like I am... icon_twisted.gif



    yet.... (icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 6:18 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    realifedad said
    southbeach1500 saidHow did it get all the way up to $1.2T when just a year ago all the Democrats were floating numbers in the $700-$800B range?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>How did the bush/cheney war Iraq go from an estimated 600 billion, several month effort to an estimated nearly 3 trillion (when long term servicemen health costs from injuries are added in as they should be) So tell me, where is our money better spent? chasing non existent WMD's or on our own citizens?


    So you don't know how the price tag almost doubled over the past year, and you are upset that I even asked the question, so you had to ask another question that has nothing to do with the health care bill, correct?


    Hmmmmmmmm I can now understand why JP chooses to put you on ignore
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 6:23 PM GMT
    AbFab1 saidYes, wasn't this just $850 billion a week or two ago? Now it's $1.2 trillion over 10 years? What happened to the original CBO estimated cost - did additional new features get added to drive the price up?

    Note I'm asking only about the cost level and reasons, not judging it (to avoid people starting to use the war costs arguments again....)


    I could be wrong on this but I believe the $850 billion price tag was the cost of the health care bill that passed the Senate Finance Committee about two weeks ago.
  • Menergy_1

    Posts: 737

    Nov 08, 2009 6:25 PM GMT
    I probably have lost track myself of which estimates belong to which bill.... Maybe the House bill was estimated at only $900 billion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 6:31 PM GMT
    GwgTrunks said
    southbeach1500 said
    realifedad said
    southbeach1500 saidHow did it get all the way up to $1.2T when just a year ago all the Democrats were floating numbers in the $700-$800B range?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>How did the bush/cheney war Iraq go from an estimated 600 billion, several month effort to an estimated nearly 3 trillion (when long term servicemen health costs from injuries are added in as they should be) So tell me, where is our money better spent? chasing non existent WMD's or on our own citizens?


    So you don't know how the price tag almost doubled over the past year, and you are upset that I even asked the question, so you had to ask another question that has nothing to do with the health care bill, correct?


    Actually they're quite related. You're complaining about government waste, correct?

    The wars in the middle east have been extremely wasteful for some time now, from the amount spent funding them to the loss of human life on both sides.

    Of the two wars only one is possible to complete the objectives of. Iraq is impossible to have a 'mission complete' status on, since we went there for WMD's... and there were never WMD's.

    The cost of the Iraq war alone has surpassed the amount requested for health care reform (which, if you're paying attention, will recoup the costs over the next 10 years... the same cannot be said of the Middle Eastern wars).

    Learn to argue properly and take into consideration all aspects, please and thank you.


    In consideration of the conservative attention span, you really need to give him the Reader's Digest version of it. Here, I'll help you out.
    Fucktard Pictures, Images and Photos

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 6:43 PM GMT
    Actually you have to troll quite hard to get strongly disliked on here....

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 6:49 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    HndsmKansan saidPOLITICO Breaking News:
    -----------------------------------------------------

    The House passed the $1.2 trillion health care plan by a 220 to 215 vote. Thirty-nine Democrats voted against it, as did every Republican except for Joseph Cao of Louisiana.



    How did it get all the way up to $1.2T when just a year ago all the Democrats were floating numbers in the $700-$800B range?


    The bill has had several estimated costs. When it came out of committee it was estimated to be around 1.1 Trillion at it was being worked on by the house there was an estimate of around 900B and the final is 1.2T. The increase in cost is due to the expansion of several current programs. So the bill has gone up and down in price over time. It is not atypical for a bill's price tag to change as it works its way through both houses.

    Also, I don't think "all" Democrats were floating that number. If you would like to offer some proof to the contrary I am certainly willing to change my mind though. Some would probably be more accurate and the 900B number was released by the Congressional Budget Office which is a nonpartisan agency.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 7:50 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Nah, it's quite easy. If someone has an opinion that is not reflective of the overwhelming majority on here, and they have the balls to stand up to the groupthink lockstep majority on here.... they are quickly marginalized.


    This sounds a lot like what happened to the Dems during those wonderful years under Georg W. Bush's supreme reign. Funny how that works, isn't it? Now the Republicans aren't getting their way, and they're absolutely pissed beyond the point of no return.

    I love it!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 08, 2009 7:57 PM GMT
    MonkeyPuck said
    southbeach1500 said
    HndsmKansan saidPOLITICO Breaking News:
    -----------------------------------------------------

    The House passed the $1.2 trillion health care plan by a 220 to 215 vote. Thirty-nine Democrats voted against it, as did every Republican except for Joseph Cao of Louisiana.



    How did it get all the way up to $1.2T when just a year ago all the Democrats were floating numbers in the $700-$800B range?


    The bill has had several estimated costs. When it came out of committee it was estimated to be around 1.1 Trillion at it was being worked on by the house there was an estimate of around 900B and the final is 1.2T. The increase in cost is due to the expansion of several current programs. So the bill has gone up and down in price over time. It is not atypical for a bill's price tag to change as it works its way through both houses.

    Also, I don't think "all" Democrats were floating that number. If you would like to offer some proof to the contrary I am certainly willing to change my mind though. Some would probably be more accurate and the 900B number was released by the Congressional Budget Office which is a nonpartisan agency.
    Excellent analysis.

    Keep in mind that in general, the House can pass legislation more easily than the Senate. So when Republicans are in control, the House version of a bill will often be more conservative than the Senate version, and vice versa in the case of a Democratically controlled Congress.

    When/if the Senate passes its version of healthcare, it's likely to be less expensive than the House version ... with the two chambers coming together to hammer out the final piece of legislation.