• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BREAKING -- Reconciliation bill will have to go back to the House

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Excerpted from “BREAKING -- Reconciliation bill will have to go back to the House” By Meredith Shiner with Chris Frates, Politico, 03:06 AM
[SIZE="+2"]T[/SIZE]he reconciliation bill will have to go back to the House for another vote after Senate parliamentarian Alan Frumin ruled early this morning that two minor provisions violated the chamber's rules and could not be included in the final bill, according to Majority Leader Harry Reid's spokesman Jim Manley.

Both provisions made technical changes to the bill's Pell Grant regulations. All told, 16 lines of text will be removed from the 153-page bill, Manley told reporters as business on the Senate floor wrapped early Thursday morning. …

It'll be over soon in the Senate, as early as 2 pm et today¹, but, it will be going back to the House.
 
It'll be over soon in the Senate, as early as 2 pm et today¹, but, it will be going back to the House.

How many new bribes will it take to be passed?
 
Why the hell is "pell grants" in a health care bill?? :doh

I haven't looked up that part of the reconciliation package but I'd bet it's something to do with shuffling some money around to pay for part of the healthcare bill.
 
I haven't looked up that part of the reconciliation package but I'd bet it's something to do with shuffling some money around to pay for part of the healthcare bill.




or it was more likley a bribe. :shrug:
 
Why the hell is "pell grants" in a health care bill?? :doh
I believe the Pell grant revisions are part of the student loan reform which was tacked onto the health care reform fixes.

My understanding is that there is typically just one reconciliation bill per year (per session?) and student loan reform, something that President Clinton tried to pass and failed, was included in the package precisely because it couldn't muster super-majority support.

The two stricken provisions were, again, my understanding, minor; so the reconciliation bill can proceed without them and it should be a straightforward vote in the House.
 
Last edited:
Dunno, how many bribes will it take to not have it be passed?

0...... just like it would have been in the House.
 
did you hear that our clever gop forced the party in power to REJECT exemptions for WOUNDED VETERANS fighting in OBAMA's WAR, afghanistan, and bush's, iraq, from the NEW TAX obamacare places on PROSTHETICS and other medical DEVICES

obamacare---EXEMPTIONS FOR THE SEIU...

BUT SQUAT FOR VETERAN AMPUTEES!

how's THAT gonna play in TV ADS?

looks like naughty nancy and obtuse obama never thought of THAT

how thoughtless...

live it, libs, love it

it's YOURS!
 
0...... just like it would have been in the House.

Yes because corporate interest doesnt pay off people to vote for the status quo, that never happens. :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl
 
Yes because corporate interest doesnt pay off people to vote for the status quo, that never happens. :rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

They don't use tax payer money (billions of tax payer money) to buy votes for an unpopular bill...... if that's what you mean.
 
They don't use tax payer money (billions of tax payer money) to buy votes for an unpopular bill...... if that's what you mean.

This bill is only unpopular for conservatives. This is one of, if not the most moderate ways reform could have happened, there isn't even a public option.

So, who's against it? obviously insurance. Insurance companies profit off of denying people and keeping as much of their money as they can, while still receiving business of course. So when corporate interest vis-a-vis insurance buys votes against ANY sort of reform, it's hillarious that you don't see the irony.
 
This bill is only unpopular for conservatives. This is one of, if not the most moderate ways reform could have happened, there isn't even a public option.

So, who's against it? obviously insurance. Insurance companies profit off of denying people and keeping as much of their money as they can, while still receiving business of course. So when corporate interest vis-a-vis insurance buys votes against ANY sort of reform, it's hillarious that you don't see the irony.




uhm they aren't they were for it. you just forced people to use them. :shrug:
 
did you hear that our clever gop forced the party in power to REJECT exemptions for WOUNDED VETERANS fighting in OBAMA's WAR, afghanistan, and bush's, iraq, from the NEW TAX obamacare places on PROSTHETICS and other medical DEVICES

obamacare---EXEMPTIONS FOR THE SEIU...

BUT SQUAT FOR VETERAN AMPUTEES!

how's THAT gonna play in TV ADS?

looks like naughty nancy and obtuse obama never thought of THAT

how thoughtless...

live it, libs, love it

it's YOURS!

You think it's clever to use wounded veterans as a political ploy?

What would you be saying if the Democrats did something like that? I'm guessing you'd be disgusted by it.

The Republicans will do anything to get back in power.

Both you and the republicans disgust me.
 
uhm they aren't they were for it. you just forced people to use them. :shrug:

For christ's sake. Remember the Lieberman thing, where he was going to change his vote and then the Left attacked his wife for that breast cancer thing?

Lieberman's wife is a HUGE lobbyist for insurance companies, and does not want any reform whatsoever. She is being bought off and so was lieberman
 
So, who's against it? obviously insurance. Insurance companies profit off of denying people and keeping as much of their money as they can, while still receiving business of course. So when corporate interest vis-a-vis insurance buys votes against ANY sort of reform, it's hillarious that you don't see the irony.

Following were among the insurance companies whose shares were heavily traded in Friday's session and the expectation is for the continuation of this trend on Monday. Shares of insurers kept climbing Friday as a key healthcare vote in congress set for the weekend loomed in the background. The upward climb in insurance stocks seemed to indicate that the market had factored in the eventual passage of the bill which could add 10's of millions of new subscribers to the insurers client base.

...

Aetna Inc. (AET) surged 3.67% to $34.46 on 14.33 million shares. The company expects first-quarter earnings to surpass Wall Street predictions, but it held to its previous projection for full-year profit.

CIGNA Corporation (CI) gained 3.46% to $37.08 on 7.78 million shares. In the past one year, the stock has rallied over 115%.

WellPoint, Inc. (WLP) went up 1.96% to $65.07 on 12.46 million shares. In the past one month, the stock has gained over 11%.

Health Net, Inc. (HNT) soared 1.55% to $26.15 on heavy volume. In the past one month, the stock has gained over 14%.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/68635-insurance-stocks-move.html
 
Correct. Like I said, this is insanely moderate reform. It's not a coincidence that conservative campaigns and votes are litered with corporate influence to keep the status quo.
 
Correct. Like I said, this is insanely moderate reform. It's not a coincidence that conservative campaigns and votes are litered with corporate influence to keep the status quo.

This is very moderate reform. Many Republicans that are now against it even supported an individual mandate.
 
This bill is only unpopular for conservatives. This is one of, if not the most moderate ways reform could have happened, there isn't even a public option.

So, who's against it? obviously insurance. Insurance companies profit off of denying people and keeping as much of their money as they can, while still receiving business of course. So when corporate interest vis-a-vis insurance buys votes against ANY sort of reform, it's hillarious that you don't see the irony.

The democrat congress..... the best money can buy.

Now that is irony.
 
ok, what does this prove?
 
Last edited:
It'll be over soon in the Senate, as early as 2 pm et today¹, but, it will be going back to the House.

that doesn't mean that it will be "over" in the Senate soon; it means it hasn't even started in the Senate yet.

Why the hell is "pell grants" in a health care bill?? :doh

it's called "no one is going to even read this thing, or care about anything that's in it other than the healthcare provisions, so we can use it to take over whatever else we like". like, for example, higher education.

you know, because the federal government has done such a wonderful job with primary and secondary education that they need more influence in the one decent educational establishment we have left.
 
Difference being PAC's more involved this cycle and NOT individual interest/lobbying

Health PACs:

Health | OpenSecrets

64-36 Dem advantage.

Z3n said:
Yes, because the health care system is broken and HEALTH SERVICES are on the side of the democrats. Insurance is another entire monster

No, it's across the board.

Health professionals: 65-35 Dems
Health services/HMOs (which includes insurers): 65-34 Dems
Hospitals/Nursing Homes: 70-30 Dems
Pharma: 60-40 Dems

Look, you can move the goalposts all you want, but the fact is that it's the Dems who are overwhemlingly the recipients of corporate largess this time, particularly from the health industry.
 
Last edited:
This bill is only unpopular for conservatives.

if you count "independents" as "conservatives", then yes.

Among partisans, the president’s party faithful are alone in supporting the proposed reforms. Sixty-six percent of Democrats favor them, while 53 percent of independents and 88 percent of Republicans oppose them.
 
Back
Top Bottom