Obama Defends Health Care Plan as Opposition Grows

red states rule

New member
Should "moderate" Dems or those with half a brain who see what a disaster Obamacare is, stop Obamacare from passing - who will the left wingers blame?

Pres Bush? Talk radio hosts? The minority Republicans?




Obama Defends Health Care Plan as Opposition Grows

White House and Democrats are struggling to bring a complex, controversial bill to remake the U.S. health care system to a vote in both houses of Congress before lawmakers recess. A bill passed two key committees Friday.



President Barack Obama continued to push his broad health care overhaul Saturday, defending the plan by calling it fiscally sound and urging Congress not to squander its moment to pass reform.

Republicans stepped up their opposition, labeling the plan as an immense financial burden that shouldn't be rushed.

Adopting an aggressive tone, Obama spent a sixth consecutive day pushing for his top domestic priority. Growing resistance on Capitol Hill -- including from conservative Democrats -- has left White House officials worried they face a tougher route to legislation than they had anticipated.

"This is what the debate in Congress is all about: whether we'll keep talking and tinkering and letting this problem fester as more families and businesses go under and more Americans lose their coverage," Obama said Saturday in his weekly radio and Internet address. "Or whether we'll seize this opportunity -- one we might not have again for generations -- and finally pass health insurance reform this year, in 2009."

The president's comments come at the end of a week of tumult for the legislation.

All week, Obama tried to project confidence on a subject that has dominated his schedule. During a closed-door meeting with Jewish leaders on Monday, he joked that the only thing more difficult than passing health care legislation might be negotiating peace in the Middle East. And on Friday, he added a last-minute White House appearance to exhort lawmakers not to "lose heart" and urged deeper cost cuts to calm concern over the huge expense of covering millions of uninsured Americans.

He continued that push Saturday as Republicans kept up their criticism.

"The president and some Democrats insist we must rush this plan through," said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. "Why? Because the more Americans know about it, the more they oppose it. Something this important needs to be done right, rather than done quickly."

On Friday, two House committees approved their portions of the sweeping health care bill over Republican objections. That left one more panel to act, but Democrats facing tough re-election bids or representing conservative districts demanded additional measures to hold down costs.

Given the complexities, as well as fresh calls for delay in the Senate, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., opened the door to pushing off a vote past the early August timeline she and Obama laid out weeks ago. While Pelosi has long said the House will vote on legislation by the time lawmakers leave on vacation at the end of July, she hedged for the first time.

"We have to see what the Senate will do," she said, before suggesting that changing the bill to produce more savings might require additional time.

It likely won't be enough to convince Republicans, who are in near-unison in opposing the Democrats' plan.

"It would empower Washington -- not doctors and patients -- to make health care decisions and would impose a new tax on working families during a recession," Kyl said in the GOP's weekly address. "They propose to pay for this new Washington-run health care system by dramatically raising taxes on small business owners."

Kyl, the Senate's No. 2 Republican, said his party's proposed amendments should be considered.

"These changes do not require government takeover of the health care system, or massive new spending, job-killing taxes or rationing of care," he said, seeking to string together the biggest fears of Obama's plan to challenge the popular president.
Obama, again, rejected the criticism out of hand.

"Now, we know there are those who will oppose reform no matter what," Obama said. "We know the same special interests and their agents in Congress will make the same old arguments and use the same scare tactics that have stopped reform before because they profit from this relentless escalation in health care costs."

Obama also repeated his pledge that his plan would not add to the federal deficit or deny patients' choices.

The president said he and his wife, Michelle, "don't want anyone telling us who our family's doctor should be -- and no one should decide that for you, either.

"Under our proposals, if you like your doctor, you keep your doctor. If you like your current insurance, you keep that insurance. Period, end of story."

That's a pledge, however, that's beyond Obama's control. His plan leaves companies free to change their health plans in ways that workers may not like or to drop insurance altogether.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/17/white-house-dems-struggling-health-care/
 
Last edited:
Nop wonder more and more people are opposed to this bill





The Senate Health Bill: Chock-Full of Bad Health Policy

Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), Senate majority leader, wants to rush the Senate health care legislation through the process by July 27, 2009. It’s not hard to see why.

After 13 days of intense debate, the Senate HELP Committee just finished work on the Senate bill (The Affordable Health Choices Act) and reported it to the full Senate for consideration. During the Committee consideration of the bill, there were hundreds of amendments, dealing with topics ranging from abortions to funding jungle gyms. Much of the internal Committee debate received little attention in the major media. But the Committee’s decisions, if the Senate bill is enacted into law, will affect every American. Consider some of the key decisions:

Covering Abortion. (Mikulski Amendment #201 ) Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) offered an amendment that would require health insurers to include “essential community providers” in their networks. They would provide “preventive care services” for women. These entities include providers like Planned Parenthood clinics, which perform abortions. Few Americans would be comfortable knowing that federal dollars would be funding abortions. In effect, this policy is directly contrary to previous congressional funding restrictions on abortion payment, such as the Hyde Amendment. Republican Senators’ attempts to exclude abortions from the bill failed.
Financing Neighborhood Construction. (Coburn Amendment #49 ) To foster creation of healthier communities, the Senate Committee bill would provide federal community transformation grants to state and local governments. However, the legislation offers only broad guidelines as to where the money can go and does not limit the size of the grant. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) offered an amendment that would prohibit the use of grant money to build and maintain sidewalks, parks, bike paths, or street lights. Other federal programs already direct money toward these projects. Dollars designated for improving the health care system, Coburn argued, could be spent on far more constructive areas, such as increasing access to health care. Remarkably, Coburn’s amendment failed on a straight party-line vote, meaning taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars can wastefully go towards projects that are already funded by the federal government.

Expanding Bureaucracy. (Coburn amendment #110) The Committee bill grows the size of the government significantly – it creates new administrations and places immense power in the hands of certain bureaucrats. Sen. Coburn’s amendment would have prevented the expansion of government and runaway federal spending by maintaining the current number of bureaucrats. His amendment was defeated. Even as the nation’s unemployment approaches ten percent, the federal bureaucracy will expand.

Expanding Welfare Eligibility. (Coburn Amendment #205) Medicaid is a poorly-performing welfare program. Ideally, it should be reformed, not expanded. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) introduced this amendment to ensure that the Committee bill’s provisions do not expand Medicaid eligibility standards and attempt to increase the number of Medicaid enrollees. State and federal budgets are already heavily strained, and the increased burden of covering the cost of more Medicaid services would be unbearable for taxpayers in many states. Coburn’s amendment failed. This means that the federal government and states, both already in budget crises, will be forced to spend even more on Medicaid.

A Taste of Their Own Medicine. (Coburn Amendment #226) For many liberals in Congress, a new public health insurance plan, to compete against private health insurance, is an absolute “must” for health care reform. Virtually all independent analysts estimate that, given the special advantages of taxpayer subsidies and regulation, that the competition would be rigged, and millions of Americans with private health insurance today would be dumped by their employers into the new public plan. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) proposed an amendment that would require all members of Congress and their staffs to enroll in the newly-created public health insurance plan. This means that they would be required to give up their private insurance coverage (nationwide there are 283 plans competing for federal employees’ dollars), which is today provided through the popular and successful Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). With many members of Congress openly willing to create incentives that would drive Americans out of their existing private coverage, Sen. Coburn put his colleagues to a test. Although 10 Senate Democrats voted against it, the Coburn amendment passed by one vote. Taxpayers should watch very closely whether this amendment is preserved or buried.

Higher Taxes and Doctors Payment Cuts. (Roberts Amendment #207 , Roberts Amendment #208) Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS) offered two amendments that would have prevented the government from raising taxes, increasing the individual mandate penalty, or decreasing payment rates to Medicare providers to cover the cost of subsidies given to low-income individuals for their insurance premiums and out-of-pocket costs. Otherwise, under the Senate bill, taxpayers would have to shoulder the burden of increased taxes, and physicians would be vulnerable to even lower government reimbursement rates for practicing in Medicare. Both amendments failed.

Blocking Anti-Rationing Amendments. (Roberts Amendment #1 , Coburn Amendment #9, Enzi Amendment #7) The Committee bill calls for an increased role of comparative effectiveness research (CER). A number of Senators fear that federal officials could use the data to determine payment, treatment, and coverage decisions, subordinating professional medical judgment in the treatment of patients to regulatory or budgetary considerations. These three amendments would have prohibited the use of CER to mandate coverage, deny care, or ration. CER, if used as a rationing tool, would obviously interfere with the traditional doctor-patient relationship. All three amendments failed on straight party-line votes. You can learn more here.

The giant Senate and House health bills would impact the personal lives of 300 million Americans. Ordinary citizens should understand that these measures are not merely focused on ways to control costs and expand coverage; they touch on how and what kind of care Americans will get, and under what circumstances they would get it. The disposition of these Senate amendments is just one indication of how members of Congress really feel about some of the most contentious issues in health care policy. It is time for every American to read these bills.

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/07/17/the-senate-health-bill-chock-full-of-bad-health-policy/
 
So in this thread we learn that Republicans and the Heritage Foundation oppose healthcare reform.

I'm shocked.

I also learned in another thread that rich people don't want to pay taxes.

Another shocker.

Here's another news flash: health insurers oppose reform.

Shock.
 
So in this thread we learn that Republicans and the Heritage Foundation oppose healthcare reform.

I'm shocked.

I also learned in another thread that rich people don't want to pay taxes.

Another shocker.

Here's another news flash: health insurers oppose reform.

Shock.

We oppose RATIONED healthcare - not a shocker

We OPPOSE higher taxes for anyone - not a shocker

Libs want more power and bigger government - not a shocker

Health insurers oppose reform that will put them out of business - not a shocker
 
We oppose RATIONED healthcare - not a shocker

We OPPOSE higher taxes for anyone - not a shocker

Libs want more power and bigger government - not a shocker

Health insurers oppose reform that will put them out of business - not a shocker


We? You have a mouse in your pocket or something?
 
the new talking point bs from the Democrat party..
go do some research if you're so interested.


Or you could link me up.

Seriously. What's the alternative? Is there an alternative bill they are proposing? An outline of a bill? A brief description of what they would most like to do?
 
Or you could link me up.

Seriously. What's the alternative? Is there an alternative bill they are proposing? An outline of a bill? A brief description of what they would most like to do?

if you were so interested, you would do it yourself..but we know you are not..
 
Or you could link me up.

Seriously. What's the alternative? Is there an alternative bill they are proposing? An outline of a bill? A brief description of what they would most like to do?
What is the policy of the Ds on letting R-proposed bills to "wend" their way through the process?

Would such an alternative gain any traction in the congress? Were they allowed to propose any such legislation or even to take part in the creation of this monolithic bill?
 
What is the policy of the Ds on letting R-proposed bills to "wend" their way through the process?

Would such an alternative gain any traction in the congress? Were they allowed to propose any such legislation or even to take part in the creation of this monolithic bill?


Republicans can propose whatever they want to propose. No one is stopping them from authoring their own bill. And, of course, they can offer up whatever amendments they'd like to see implemented.

Typically, the opposition party puts together it's own bill and offers it up as an amendment in the nature of a substitute so that they can say "hey, we tried" after the amendment is rejected.

Instead of doing that, the Republicans have decided to just attack what the Democrats are doing. Now, that would be fine if the Republicans took the position that the status quo is fine but they aren't really doing that either. They're basically saying that there are problems and the Democratic solution sucks but they aren't offering a solution of their own.
 
No alternative needed, Hillarycare sucked in the 90's and it still sucked.
Moderate democrats are against it as well, they value re-election of far left ideology.
Hillarcare goes down like Joe Frazier.
 
Instead of doing that, the Republicans have decided to just attack what the Democrats are doing. Now, that would be fine if the Republicans took the position that the status quo is fine but they aren't really doing that either. They're basically saying that there are problems and the Democratic solution sucks but they aren't offering a solution of their own.

yikes, so we are being accused of doing the same as the Democrats do..attack the Democrats bill that they propose..how dare us..
 
yikes, so we are being accused of doing the same as the Democrats do..attack the Democrats bill that they propose..how dare us..


I'm not accusing anyone of anything. Republicans are attacking the Democrats' bill. And, as I said, that's fine and to be expected.

The problem is that at the same time the Republicans concede that the healthcare system does not function properly but they offer no alternative solution.
 
I'm not accusing anyone of anything. Republicans are attacking the Democrats' bill. And, as I said, that's fine and to be expected.

The problem is that at the same time the Republicans concede that the healthcare system does not function properly but they offer no alternative solution.

our healthcare system functions just fine..it could us a few tweaks here and there, but we don't need this MASSIVE takeover of our health care system by "the Hugo Obama" and his crooked administration....

that is what a lot of people are opposed too..
but you are in favor of a Government run health care system, so showing you anything else is pointless..
 
Back
Top