• 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!

Would you have signed or vetoed the health care bill?

Would you have signed or vetoed the health care bill?

  • Total voters
    65
ronpaulvoter

ronpaulvoter

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
627
Reaction score
111
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
If you were President, would you have signed or vetoed the new health care bill?
 
I would have vetoed. The reason is the student loan rider that was included, and special deals to certain States.
 
I would have vetoed it and then walked around bitch slapping every single person who voted for it.
 
mike2810 said:
I would have vetoed. The reason is the student loan rider that was included, and special deals to certain States.
Click to expand...

Here I agree.
It is wrong to add any section or amendment to any bill which is unrelated.
I'd love to see this practice banned.
But I do favor the student loan bill....and this should have been fixed long ago...but with the party of no around....
 
I would have vetoed it. They went about trying to reform access to healthcare in all the wrong ways.
 
I would have vetoed it. It wasn't made according to what the nation wants an what the nation needs, there are tons of special deals and secret legislation snuck in there. Plus I think it's too long, it should be passed in increments to where there can be proper debate and short enough where each congressman/senator can read the whole thing. If anything I would have added that we should pass a law that forces all congressman/senators to read the entire bill before the actual vote, maybe then they won't write massive bills filled with secret crap.
 
I would have vetoed it. Sure, we probably need health care reform, but Obama and the Democrats refused to actually address the real problems with health care, they wanted to slap an absurdly expensive bandage on the problem, just like they did for the financial crisis, without even talking about the underlying causes.

That's where liberalism always fails.
 
Cephus said:
I would have vetoed it. Sure, we probably need health care reform, but Obama and the Democrats refused to actually address the real problems with health care, they wanted to slap an absurdly expensive bandage on the problem, just like they did for the financial crisis, without even talking about the underlying causes.

That's where liberalism always fails.
Click to expand...

What are the underlying causes that they didn't address?
 
ronpaulvoter said:
If you were President, would you have signed or vetoed the new health care bill?
Click to expand...

Looking at the position of President Obama, you couldn't expect him to do anything but sign it. If I was in his position, after using so much of my time to get the bill passed, I would practically have to sign it, regardless of what it had.

If I hadn't spent so much time supporting it, I would probably veto it, and demand Congress pass a bill without so much crap, and so many special deals for votes.
 
Last edited:
I would have vetoed it because it does nothing to address one of the main problems we face in our health care system which is bringing down the costs of premiums. If we still can't afford to pay the ridiculous costs than how can you even consider this legislation "reform."
 
I don't understand how all these people have opinions on the bill when they haven't even read it. How do you know what's in the bill? Do you just believe everything politicians and pundits say?
 
Progressive86 said:
I would have vetoed it because it does nothing to address one of the main problems we face in our health care system which is bringing down the costs of premiums. If we still can't afford to pay the ridiculous costs than how can you even consider this legislation "reform."
Click to expand...

How do you know it doesn't? Have you read it?
 
Jucon said:
What are the underlying causes that they didn't address?
Click to expand...

The insurance industry and the legal industry. If they got both of those under control, health care wouldn't be so expensive to begin with, most people could afford it without governmental help. But they don't want to regulate either because both are major political contributors.
 
Cephus said:
The insurance industry and the legal industry. If they got both of those under control, health care wouldn't be so expensive to begin with, most people could afford it without governmental help. But they don't want to regulate either because both are major political contributors.
Click to expand...

What you say is in part correct.

What you fail to mention is the Drug Companies who apart from giving Obama $80 Billion next year have also sharply raised their prices on their products.
Drug companies are not stupid, they all have shareholders, so if the dividend they pay needs to remain the same in spite of them giving this huge amount to Healthcare reform, that money must be recouped.
The only folk who will lose out are those that are compelled to purchase the product.
 
pro-bipartisan said:
I don't understand how all these people have opinions on the bill when they haven't even read it. How do you know what's in the bill? Do you just believe everything politicians and pundits say?
Click to expand...

Just following what are elected leaders do, react without fully reading:mrgreen:. You really think that our reps or staff read ever page?

I'll admit I only did a quick scan through on whatever version was up at the time. I also will say I relied on news reports from various sources (local/national and internet) to know that: The student loan bill was a rider and that it was reported some states got deals on medicare costs. I objected to both of those items.
 
The bill as it was passed is garbage. It needed to be scrapped.

I know reform of our health care system is needed, this bill was not it.
 
Last edited:
I voted veto...but I find it interesting the poll results so far reflect the countries sentiments.
 
Are you kidding?

I'd veto just about -everything- Congress sent me.
 
repeter said:
Looking at the position of President Obama, you couldn't expect him to do anything but sign it. If I was in his position, after using so much of my time to get the bill passed, I would practically have to sign it, regardless of what it had.

If I hadn't spent so much time supporting it, I would probably veto it, and demand Congress pass a bill without so much crap, and so many special deals for votes.
Click to expand...

That's a good double-talk. If I had made the mistake of supporting it earlier and then discovered what a disaster it was, I would have vetoed it in a New York nanosecond.

Obama is either incredibly corrupt or incredibly stupid. He is either busting his butt to destroy America's economy or is dreaming of an impossible something for nothing Utopia.


pro-bipartisan said:
I don't understand how all these people have opinions on the bill when they haven't even read it. How do you know what's in the bill? Do you just believe everything politicians and pundits say?
Click to expand...

ANY bill that is too lengthy, too complicated, or even smells of being unconstitutional would get an immediate veto from me.


Blackdog said:
The bill as it was passed is garbage. It needed to be scrapped.

I know reform of our health care system is needed, this bill was not it.
Click to expand...

Part 1: You bet it did.

Part 2: The only reform we need is to roll back all the government regulations, restrictions and mandates that have been imposed over the last 100 years.
 
pro-bipartisan said:
How do you know it doesn't? Have you read it?
Click to expand...
I'm reading it currently, and I can tell you as an insurance professional that it most certainly will not reduce costs, it will exacerbate the problem. Risk models are skewed towards the negative with the mandates on private companies, liabilities are increased, and the "public option" foundation has not stop loss mechanism. This is going to be painfully expensive.
 
I would sign it, but only if Congress made the promise to make a Public Option in some seperate bill sometime soon.
 
Would you have signed or vetoed the health care bill?
Click to expand...


That's a dog-gone good question. I am not sure what I would have done.

If I was to veto it, it would be because I don't think it did enough.

If I was to sign it, it would only be because the longest journey begins with the first step and I would only do so fearing that a veto would put this necessary legislation on the back-burner for another 20 years. I honestly believe, underneath it all, that's EXACTLY what the GOP would want to do. Kill it.

But, it is what it is. We got it. I think we should start now building upon it and improving it. And I would hope it could be done in a bipartisan manner. But asking the GOP to cooperate is like asking a baby not to cry. Just ain't gonna happen. Big business is too deep in their pockets. Let the people eat cake. It's all about their money to them, IMO.
 
Last edited:
The kind of funding it takes to get the whole of senate to accept voting on bills without having read them.... any one of them could have called Obama on his promise to allow a full week for anyone to read the bill before there's a vote on them.

I voted that if I were president and these conditions were present, I would sign the bill, because it would be political suicide to pull those kinds of strings. (Unless pretty well no senators have any balls for real)

It's clear that Obama asked himself : 'What would George W do?"
 
LaMidRighter said:
I'm reading it currently, and I can tell you as an insurance professional that it most certainly will not reduce costs, it will exacerbate the problem. Risk models are skewed towards the negative with the mandates on private companies, liabilities are increased, and the "public option" foundation has not stop loss mechanism. This is going to be painfully expensive.
Click to expand...

Can you cite information from the bill that supports that conclusion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom