.Obama prods Congress to pass health bill quickly

[Felix The Assassin]

What happened to the "promised" bipartisanship? Where is the bill being hosted on line for "the people" to see for at least three days before vote? This guy has got to be one of the biggest liars ever elected, his place will sit well next to Woodrow Wilson.

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is prodding House and Senate Democrats to get him a final health care bill as soon as possible, encouraging them to bypass the usual negotiations between the two chambers in the interest of speed.

Obama delivered the message at an Oval Office meeting Tuesday evening with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his No. 2, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., joined in by phone.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/..._care_overhaul

[Cerek]

I don't consider Obama to be a bigger liar than any other President. I am disappointed by the failed promise to post new legislation online for public viewing for 5 days before signing it, but how many people would honestly take advantage of that? You can obtain a copy of the healthcare bill for your viewing pleasure if you want, but how many of the 1000+ pages will most people actually read? I've read a good portion of it, but not all of it.

As for bipartisanship, Obama has reached out to the Repub side for negotiations and those efforts have been unilaterally rebuffed. The Repub leaders have told their members they are to vote against the proposed health care bill - period. It's kinda hard to have bipartisanship when the other side refuses to talk with you. Obama and the Dems don't need any Repub votes. They could push the bill through on their own without any support from Repubs and the GOP would be powerless to stop it. If the Repubs were in that position, you can bet the they would have done that already, because that's what they've done in the past.

The bottom line is that the healthcare bill will be considered one of the signature events of Obama's Administration (for better or worse) and we are going to have some form of national healthcare when all is said and done.

I don't agree with Obama's push to get the bill through as quickly as possible. I agree with a female Senator I saw on TV a few weeks ago who said it would be better to do it right than to do it fast. However, the Repubs don't have any real intention of supporting the bill and, if Obama continues trying to negotiate, they will just continue stalling for the next 3 years.

So, we will end up with some form of national healthcare, which by the Administrations own admission, is going to be subsidizing premiums for 30-40 million policyholders right out of the gate. It isn't going to do a thing to actually lower healthcare costs and will only serve to make healthcare coverage mandatory for everyone. But once it's passed, it can always be amended or ratified by future Administrations.

[ElfBane]

Felix, it's gone to committee, right? To resolve the differences in the bills? Then there is no final bill to post, correct?

As to bipartisanship, that's a load. It was offered, it wasn't taken...steamroller time! It's just a case of "turnabout is fair play", as I see it. The Damnocrats certainly spent their time in the Wilderness.

Anyway, the damn thing appears to be a huge piece of Pork for the Insurance Industry...and doesn't come close to what I wanted, Socialized Medicine. But it does appear to get the Camel's Nose into the Tent!!!

[Timber Loftis]

/cheer Obama
GoBama!!! It's not just for Crimson Tide fans anymore.

Seriously, though, what are we talking about here?

They agreed that rather than setting up a formal conference committee to resolve differences between health bills passed last year by the House and Senate, the House will work off the Senate's version, amend it and send it back to the Senate for final passage

Oh teh noes!! Here come ze jackbooted thugz!! Amirite?

Hmm... so it appears our media, and our resident assassin, would like to have us enjoy a cup of teapot tempest. You know, I can forgive the media for it -- they in fact get paid to create teapot tempests. But, really, Felix, must you go along in the farce?

[Chewbacca]

Repubs don't want bipartisanship-rarely do they even pretend, they just wanna win and at any cost.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally Posted by Cerek I am disappointed by the failed promise to post new legislation online for public viewing for 5 days before signing it, but how many people would honestly take advantage of that? You can obtain a copy of the healthcare bill for your viewing pleasure if you want, but how many of the 1000+ pages will most people actually read? I've read a good portion of it, but not all of it.

I am disappointed about the 5 day public viewing thing, too. Not every president will make me 100% happy, I'm afraid.

There are plenty of summaries of the bills if you don't want to read the full texts. Your state and every state has a health care agency and health care industry groups, both of which tend to put out sufficient summaries.

As for bipartisanship, Obama has reached out to the Repub side for negotiations and those efforts have been unilaterally rebuffed.

Yep. Gobama wants to address what society needs -- the Republicans want to score points for their next election.

They could push the bill through on their own without any support from Repubs and the GOP would be powerless to stop it.

Not quite. Getting 2 Dems to agree on anything is hard -- they're a notoriously individualistic lot.

If the Repubs were in that position, you can bet the they would have done that already, because that's what they've done in the past.

Damned skippy. I wish the looney left had that kind a YAVOL! mentality when it came down to der wishes ov der fuhrer.

The bottom line is that the healthcare bill will be considered one of the signature events of Obama's Administration (for better or worse) and we are going to have some form of national healthcare when all is said and done.

I don't know if it's true that we'll have some form of national healthcare.

I don't agree with Obama's push to get the bill through as quickly as possible. I agree with a female Senator I saw on TV a few weeks ago who said it would be better to do it right than to do it fast.

I don't know how you can consider it "fast." It's speed has been positively glacial. It needs to get done, so he can move on to other big ticket projects.

It isn't going to do a thing to actually lower healthcare costs and will only serve to make healthcare coverage mandatory for everyone.

Not necessarily true.

Most people forget that the big fight over this bill has been over 10-20% of its content. 80% of it has been little-fussed-over and much-needed regulatory reform. There's some significant change coming.

But once it's passed, it can always be amended or ratified by future Administrations.

Yes. Most of our laws have gone through an incremental process. You start with something then you work to adjust and learn as you go. In fact, this new health care law isn't anything "new" so much as it is part of that very process of evolution.

[Cerek]

Good points and counterpoints, TL.

I do think some form of national healthcare (or gov't run healthcare) will eventually happen and this is the first step in that process. As I've said before, that isn't necessarily a bad thing (some other countries make it work quite well), but I'm not sure if our government could implement and run a health system as well as some others (almost all nations with national or universal healthcare have parliamentary governments).

When I say the bill should be done right instead of "fast", I'm talking about addressing all the major needs rather than getting something put together that can be pushed through. However, you make a good point that the majority of this bill does address many of the needed reforms, so it is probably as good a place to start as any.

I don't really like the idea of mandatory health coverage, but I'm going to have health insurance regardless, so it really won't change or affect what I do now. It just might add to the taxes I pay once I am fully employed again. But I accept taxes as a part of life in America and just focus on how much I bring home.

[SpiritWarrior]

As I said before, they got bipartisanship, and they bit it on the hand. They don't want to play ball, so play without 'em. But let's not hear them cry about not being included - they were - and they couldn't play nice. So they're out.

As for "biggest liar", wel all know that position is already well taken.

[robertthebard]

Originally Posted by SpiritWarrior As I said before, they got bipartisanship, and they bit it on the hand. They don't want to play ball, so play without 'em. But let's not hear them cry about not being included - they were - and they couldn't play nice. So they're out. As for "biggest liar", wel all know that position is already well taken.

You mean, the politician that's talking the most at any particular moment?

[Felix The Assassin]

Originally Posted by Timber Loftis /cheer Obama GoBama!!! It's not just for Crimson Tide fans anymore. Seriously, though, what are we talking about here? Oh teh noes!! Here come ze jackbooted thugz!! Amirite? Hmm... so it appears our media, and our resident assassin, would like to have us enjoy a cup of teapot tempest. You know, I can forgive the media for it -- they in fact get paid to create teapot tempests. But, really, Felix, must you go along in the farce?

I think you missed my point while reading the article TL.

The main points I referenced was candidate Obama's campaign lies. Transparency has yet to evolve. Posting of the bill for me and my family who are the voting people to read before it goes to congress has also failed to materialize. And the bipartisanship, thou that can be self induced, and plenty of blame to go around, yet another failure to attempt to appease it. You might be slightly obscured to this as you are familiar with Chicago style politics, and it appears to be the norm for you. However, it's not what he campaigned, which had a lot of folks believing in him. If the (R) chose to *not* be involved, then so be it, but I say look at what was given to the great state of Nebraska to keep a (D) vote. That in-itself shows there is no collaboration from the (D) side is favored today, but might not be so strong in the future. Not that one party changer, and three announced retirements really mean anything, but it is a sign none the less.

@ RTB, truer words have not been typed around these parts in a long time.