Congress followed the People's Mandate

[dbackjon]

In 2008, the VOTERS overwhelming elected Democrats to the House, Senater and Presidency.

A major hallmark of the election was health care reform.


Despite the greatest efforts of the radical right to subvert the will of the people, the people prevailed.



A great day for Democracy - the people have spoken!

[ASUG8]

The people may have wanted health care reform, but they didn't want the proposal that has now been approved by our House. I'm sure there's a lot of back slapping and glad handing amongst the Democratic ranks today, but the polls of public opinion are squarely not in lockstep with this solution. Congress is changing healthcare, but ignored their constituencies - time will tell if they were right and lots of folks may have to eat some crow.

I would argue that 219 House members + 1 President prevailed, but not the people.

[FargoBison]

The more the people heard about Obama's bill the less they liked it.

Obama was given a mandate to fix Washington and clean up for the failures of the Republican party. Sadly all he has done is make things worse. This bill was a disgrace, not a single Republican vote in favor, in fact all it had was bipartisan opposition.

[Skjellyfetti]

The people may have wanted health care reform, but they didn't want the proposal that has now been approved by our House. I'm sure there's a lot of back slapping and glad handing amongst the Democratic ranks today, but the polls of public opinion are squarely not in lockstep with this solution. Congress is changing healthcare, but ignored their constituencies - time will tell if they were right and lots of folks may have to eat some crow.

I would argue that 219 House members + 1 President prevailed, but not the people.

Name specifics.

What was in the that passed yesterday and will soon be signed that Obama didn't campaign on? Pretty sure it was laid out for the American people quite a long time ago.

[GSUAlumniEagle]

The people may have wanted health care reform, but they didn't want the proposal that has now been approved by our House. I'm sure there's a lot of back slapping and glad handing amongst the Democratic ranks today, but the polls of public opinion are squarely not in lockstep with this solution. Congress is changing healthcare, but ignored their constituencies - time will tell if they were right and lots of folks may have to eat some crow.

You do understand that, in fact, the proposal that the Democrats ran on in 2008 was actually MORE liberal than the one voted on yesterday don't you?

I'm willing to bet that a large portion of those people crying out today about how bad this bill is are the very same ones who voted for Obama and indirectly the health care package in 2008. Which proves the people of this country are really stupid and don't know what the hell they really want. They're susceptible to the lies and the deceit of our political system.

Just watching CNN yesterday a gentlemen e-mailed in and asked how a government run public option wouldn't bankrupt the private insurance industry. He railed against the public option. Had no clue that the public option wasn't even on the table anymore.

Call me a leftist elitist. But this is one issue that was so muddled up by the media that no one has the facts right -- so to think that I should give a damn about the opinion of someone who doesn't know what the hell they're talking about is a little absurd.

[ASUG8]

The people may have wanted health care reform, but they didn't want the proposal that has now been approved by our House. I'm sure there's a lot of back slapping and glad handing amongst the Democratic ranks today, but the polls of public opinion are squarely not in lockstep with this solution. Congress is changing healthcare, but ignored their constituencies - time will tell if they were right and lots of folks may have to eat some crow.

I would argue that 219 House members + 1 President prevailed, but not the people.

Name specifics.

What was in the that passed yesterday and will soon be signed that Obama didn't campaign on? Pretty sure it was laid out for the American people quite a long time ago.

Show me that the plan that passed yesterday is what he proposed to voters while he was campaigning. If that was the case, then I don't think we'd be seeing the negativity, protests, town hall meeting gone awry, and unfavorable poll numbers that were noted in one of the other dozen threads on this today (Rasmussen, I believe it was). Obama was purposely nebulous in his comments on the campaign trail, which is why many people questioned his substance. Maybe he'll make liars out of all of us, but it feels like this got ramrodded through without many of these "representatives of the people" actually reading the legalese.

[OL FU]

The people may have wanted health care reform, but they didn't want the proposal that has now been approved by our House. I'm sure there's a lot of back slapping and glad handing amongst the Democratic ranks today, but the polls of public opinion are squarely not in lockstep with this solution. Congress is changing healthcare, but ignored their constituencies - time will tell if they were right and lots of folks may have to eat some crow.

I would argue that 219 House members + 1 President prevailed, but not the people.

Name specifics.

What was in the that passed yesterday and will soon be signed that Obama didn't campaign on? Pretty sure it was laid out for the American people quite a long time ago.

Not that I particularly care because I don't think Obama really cares about specifics, but my recollection is that Hillary ran on mandates and OBama chided her for that position. The major component of this bill is mandates.

[OL FU]

However, in one way Dback is right on. The people voted for Democrats and the people got what they voted for. It is one of the ways the system works. Now people will have the opportunity to change that decision (if they so choose).

[Baldy]

In 2008, the VOTERS overwhelming elected Democrats to the House, Senater and Presidency.

A major hallmark of the election was health care reform.


Despite the greatest efforts of the radical right to subvert the will of the people, the people prevailed.



A great day for Democracy - the people have spoken!

Since Obama's popularity has been nosediving ever since he took the oath of office, you don't think it's possible that the country is having a case of buyers remorse?

[Baldy]

But this is one issue that was so muddled up by the media that no one has the facts right -- so to think that I should give a damn about the opinion of someone who doesn't know what the hell they're talking about is a little absurd.

As we are finding out, I guess the same could be said about the people who voted for Obama.

[ASUG8]

The people may have wanted health care reform, but they didn't want the proposal that has now been approved by our House. I'm sure there's a lot of back slapping and glad handing amongst the Democratic ranks today, but the polls of public opinion are squarely not in lockstep with this solution. Congress is changing healthcare, but ignored their constituencies - time will tell if they were right and lots of folks may have to eat some crow.

You do understand that, in fact, the proposal that the Democrats ran on in 2008 was actually MORE liberal than the one voted on yesterday don't you?

I'm willing to bet that a large portion of those people crying out today about how bad this bill is are the very same ones who voted for Obama and indirectly the health care package in 2008. Which proves the people of this country are really stupid and don't know what the hell they really want. They're susceptible to the lies and the deceit of our political system.

Just watching CNN yesterday a gentlemen e-mailed in and asked how a government run public option wouldn't bankrupt the private insurance industry. He railed against the public option. Had no clue that the public option wasn't even on the table anymore.

Call me a leftist elitist. But this is one issue that was so muddled up by the media that no one has the facts right -- so to think that I should give a damn about the opinion of someone who doesn't know what the hell they're talking about is a little absurd.

You and I would likely disagree on a lot of things since I'm a fiscal conservative/social moderate, but I think you nailed it on the head on your last paragraph. I started out trying to listen to this debate and get a solid understanding of it, but gave up after a while because of all the posturing from either side. I'd love for someone to OBJECTIVELY lay out the pros and cons and attempt to quantify whether this is a benefit or detriment to the economy of the US. Is healthcare broken? Sure, a lot of parts of it are, no argument there. Did it need reform? Absolutely - very few things in life couldn't benefit from continuous improvement efforts. But this plan was treated as an expedited order to be done quickly by a certain date, damn the consequences of possibly omitting important items.

[travelinman67]

However, in one way Dback is right on. The people voted for Democrats and the people got what they voted for. It is one of the ways the system works. Now people will have the opportunity to change that decision (if they so choose).

Spot on.

During the election, thousands of pundits and political analysts attempted to warn voters that Obama and Company would wreak economic havoc upon America and pull all stops to impose socialist policies on it's people.

Yet voters elected the Dems anyway.

Americans got what they voted for.

[Skjellyfetti]

Show me that the plan that passed yesterday is what he proposed to voters while he was campaigning. If that was the case, then I don't think we'd be seeing the negativity, protests, town hall meeting gone awry, and unfavorable poll numbers that were noted in one of the other dozen threads on this today (Rasmussen, I believe it was). Obama was purposely nebulous in his comments on the campaign trail, which is why many people questioned his substance. Maybe he'll make liars out of all of us, but it feels like this got ramrodded through without many of these "representatives of the people" actually reading the legalese.

Senator Obama would prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage on the basis of health or age.

He would mandate insurance for children.

He also would require employers to cover their workers or pay a payroll tax to help subsidize government coverage for the uninsured. Some small businesses would be exempt, and would be offered tax credits to provide coverage for workers.

Mr. Obama would strive for universal coverage by establishing a new federal health plan for the uninsured, providing benefits comparable to those offered to federal employees.

Premiums would be subsidized for low earners. Eligibility for other public programs — Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Plan — would be expanded.

Mr. Obama also would establish a government exchange that would allow individuals to shop for the new public plan and approved private plans.

Among his proposals for controlling costs is a $50 billion investment in health information technology over five years.

Mr. Obama would pay for much of his plan by raising income taxes on those earning more than $250,000.

Would require that all children have health insurance; aims for universal coverage

Require employers to provide insurance or contribute to the cost, but exempt smallest businesses, and reimburse all employers for catastrophic health costs.

Provide subsidies for low-income people.

Create purchasing pool with choice of competing private plans and one public plan like Medicare.

Make plans portable from job to job.

Expand Medicaid and State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

Prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to people with health problems or charging them higher rates.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/presi ... ealth.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Line by line that's what Obama ran on and that's what's in the bill that passed yesterday. (even the tax increase on those making $250,000+

The 2008 election wasn't that long ago... you can't really have forgotten how much both candidates droned on and on and on about health care, can you?

And, since ASUG8 didn't feel like tackling ( ) any of you Conks want to jump in and try:

Name specifics.

What was in the that passed yesterday and will soon be signed that Obama didn't campaign on? Pretty sure it was laid out for the American people quite a long time ago.

[Skjellyfetti]

But this is one issue that was so muddled up by the media that no one has the facts right -- so to think that I should give a damn about the opinion of someone who doesn't know what the hell they're talking about is a little absurd.

I agree with this completely.

I'll also add that a lot of the blame has to fall on the Obama administration. They completely bungled it when they rolled out their plans last Summer and lost the message to the Republicans who began their scare tactics of DEATH PANELS!!! and such.

[OL FU]

Show me that the plan that passed yesterday is what he proposed to voters while he was campaigning. If that was the case, then I don't think we'd be seeing the negativity, protests, town hall meeting gone awry, and unfavorable poll numbers that were noted in one of the other dozen threads on this today (Rasmussen, I believe it was). Obama was purposely nebulous in his comments on the campaign trail, which is why many people questioned his substance. Maybe he'll make liars out of all of us, but it feels like this got ramrodded through without many of these "representatives of the people" actually reading the legalese.

Senator Obama would prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage on the basis of health or age. He would mandate insurance for children. He also would require employers to cover their workers or pay a payroll tax to help subsidize government coverage for the uninsured. Some small businesses would be exempt, and would be offered tax credits to provide coverage for workers.

Mr. Obama would strive for universal coverage by establishing a new federal health plan for the uninsured, providing benefits comparable to those offered to federal employees. Premiums would be subsidized for low earners. Eligibility for other public programs — Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Plan — would be expanded. Mr. Obama also would establish a government exchange that would allow individuals to shop for the new public plan and approved private plans.

Among his proposals for controlling costs is a $50 billion investment in health information technology over five years.

Mr. Obama would pay for much of his plan by raising income taxes on those earning more than $250,000.

Would require that all children have health insurance; aims for universal coverage

Require employers to provide insurance or contribute to the cost, but exempt smallest businesses, and reimburse all employers for catastrophic health costs.

Provide subsidies for low-income people.

Create purchasing pool with choice of competing private plans and one public plan like Medicare.

Make plans portable from job to job.

Expand Medicaid and State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

Prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage to people with health problems or charging them higher rates.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/presi ... ealth.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Line by line that's what Obama ran on and that's what's in the bill that passed yesterday.

The 2008 election wasn't that long ago... you can't really have forgotten how much both candidates droned on and on and on about health care, can you?

And, since ASUG8 didn't feel like tackling ( ) any of you Conks want to jump in and try:

Name specifics.

What was in the that passed yesterday and will soon be signed that Obama didn't campaign on? Pretty sure it was laid out for the American people quite a long time ago.

Did he run supporting mandates? I thought he opposed them while Hilary supported them. Just asking.

[Rob Iola]

I think the basic problem is that no one believes that Obamacare will actually cut the deficit, but that it will actually be a huge new entitlement program that, in the absence of true cost controls ($50 billion investment in health IT is a cost control?!?), will hasten the day that no-one buys our debt. Couple that with perceived cuts in service and care and it's pretty clear why polls come out against Obamacare.

[SuperHornet]

Rep Jerry McNerney is SO out on his rear after this tr@sh....

[ASUG8]

I'm sure the timing of the crossover is just coincidence, KY.

I never stated that I was an expert on this legislation (and I doubt you'll find many in the House who are either), but I can read public opinion polls and correlate them with actions taken by an individual or group. The Dems tried to push through a comprehensive plan in August of last year JUST TO BEAT THE RECESS - does that sound like maybe it was some artificial timetable, that maybe some corners were getting cut? Sure does to me. This one had a few more months of thought put into it, a lot of concessions amongst the supermajority just to get them to agree with it within their own party....the fact that a number of Dems crossed the aisle and said no to this says a lot to me. Maybe it's a great start, but not quite ready for public consumption just yet.

[Skjellyfetti]

Did he run supporting mandates? I thought he opposed them while Hilary supported them. Just asking.

I knew OL FU would be up to the challenge.

He was always for them with exemptions (like what we ended up with). Hillary Clinton supporters and those in favor of 100% universal health care wouldn't consider a plan with the exemptions to be a mandate at all. So, I guess it depends on what your definition of mandate is.

And, I do concede that Obama shifted his health care positions slightly after the primaries to face John McCain. It was only slightly and he still laid out his case for 5 or 6 months to the American people.

[ASUG8]

I think the basic problem is that no one believes that Obamacare will actually cut the deficit, but that it will actually be a huge new entitlement program that, in the absence of true cost controls ($50 billion investment in health IT is a cost control?!?), will hasten the day that no-one buys our debt. Couple that with perceived cuts in service and care and it's pretty clear why polls come out against Obamacare.

Exactly the point Rob - there are so many numbers flying around right now who do you believe? Everybody has some bias - it's in our DNA. But I'd like something CLOSE to objective so (and to GSU's point earlier) the masses in the US that will be directly impacted by this understand it not from a Conk or Donk perspective, but what's really going to happen. This is a great time for transparency.

[travelinman67]

Show me that the plan that passed yesterday is what he proposed to voters while he was campaigning. If that was the case, then I don't think we'd be seeing the negativity, protests, town hall meeting gone awry, and unfavorable poll numbers that were noted in one of the other dozen threads on this today (Rasmussen, I believe it was). Obama was purposely nebulous in his comments on the campaign trail, which is why many people questioned his substance. Maybe he'll make liars out of all of us, but it feels like this got ramrodded through without many of these "representatives of the people" actually reading the legalese.

Line by line that's what Obama ran on and that's what's in the bill that passed yesterday. (even the tax increase on those making $250,000+

Name specifics.

What was in the that passed yesterday and will soon be signed that Obama didn't campaign on? Pretty sure it was laid out for the American people quite a long time ago.

Obama/Pelosi/Reid dropped to their knees and fellated Big Pharma for money like the political whores they are...

Pharma Dodges Threats in Health Care Bill

http://www.smartmoney.com/breaking-news ... 321-000364

...and the Direct Negotiations deletion which Pharma shelled out $150 million in "supportive ads" for...

...specifically, at 23:00 in the Newport News,VA speech he gave on October 4, 2008 and is linked below, he stated:

"First, we'll take on the drug and insurance companies and hold them accountable for the prices they charge and the harm they cause... And then we'll tell the pharmaceutical companies, 'Thanks but no thanks for overpriced drugs'. Drugs that cost twice as much here as they do in Europe and Canada and Mexico. We'll let Medicare negotiate for lower prices. We'll stop drug companies from blocking generic drugs that are just as effective and far less expensive. We'll allow the safe reimportation of low-cost drugs from countries like Canada."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/0 ... 54833.html


What part of that broken promise (lie) don't you understand, Jellydonut?

[OL FU]

Did he run supporting mandates? I thought he opposed them while Hilary supported them. Just asking.

I knew OL FU would be up to the challenge.

He was always for them with exemptions (like what we ended up with). Hillary Clinton supporters and those in favor of 100% universal health care wouldn't consider a plan with the exemptions to be a mandate at all. So, I guess it depends on what your definition of mandate is.

And, I do concede that Obama shifted his health care positions slightly after the primaries to face John McCain. It was only slightly and he still laid out his case for 5 or 6 months to the American people.

Like I said I didn't pay attention to the details because (as I said) I don't think Obama gets too hung on the details just the overall goal or agenda (depending on your view point).

[Skjellyfetti]

I think the basic problem is that no one believes that Obamacare will actually cut the deficit, but that it will actually be a huge new entitlement program that, in the absence of true cost controls ($50 billion investment in health IT is a cost control?!?), will hasten the day that no-one buys our debt. Couple that with perceived cuts in service and care and it's pretty clear why polls come out against Obamacare.

Exactly the point Rob - there are so many numbers flying around right now who do you believe? Everybody has some bias - it's in our DNA. But I'd like something CLOSE to objective so (and to GSU's point earlier) the masses in the US that will be directly impacted by this understand it not from a Conk or Donk perspective, but what's really going to happen. This is a great time for transparency.

I agree with this. The media is horrible and is either way to the left or way to the right. If you're interested in learning what's actually in the bill... I think the best place to start would be a place that just lists what's actually in the bill without any spin. It's easier to make up your own mind from their, imo.

Here's one, I'm sure there are lots of others:
http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/ ... _final.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ASUG8]

Exactly the point Rob - there are so many numbers flying around right now who do you believe? Everybody has some bias - it's in our DNA. But I'd like something CLOSE to objective so (and to GSU's point earlier) the masses in the US that will be directly impacted by this understand it not from a Conk or Donk perspective, but what's really going to happen. This is a great time for transparency.

I agree with this. The media is horrible and is either way to the left or way to the right. If you're interested in learning what's actually in the bill... I think the best place to start would be a place that just lists what's actually in the bill without any spin. It's easier to make up your own mind from their, imo.

Here's one, I'm sure there are lots of others:
http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/ ... _final.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oh, like I'm gonna trust one of your links for objectivity......j/k

[GannonFan]

I think the basic problem is that no one believes that Obamacare will actually cut the deficit, but that it will actually be a huge new entitlement program that, in the absence of true cost controls ($50 billion investment in health IT is a cost control?!?), will hasten the day that no-one buys our debt. Couple that with perceived cuts in service and care and it's pretty clear why polls come out against Obamacare.

And that's the crux of the matter. I don't think people are seriously against better taking care of 32M people who don't have health insurance or cutting out the more agregious health care insurance practices. But the main problem is, now that we spend all this money doing this, and assuming this is all that we're going to spend doing this (which is unlikely as these things are typically much more expensive than initially proposed) how do we afford to fix everything else that is begging for money in America. We've basically shot our load with this reform and now we have nothing for anything else. What happens when states go broke in the next few years, what happens when the economy trickles along for several years without significant job growth, what happens when public pensions come due and are woefully underfunded? A country has never taxed itself into prosperity, but it looks like we may try doing that.