• 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!

Democrats Post Health Care Bill Online, Starting 72-Hour Clock

Erod

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,483
Reaction score
8,227
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
FOXNews.com - Democrats Post Health Care Bill Online, Starting 72-Hour Clock

/
The updated health care reform bill has been posted online, starting the clock on a 72-hour window before the House can vote on it.

President Obama pledged in an interview with Fox News on Wednesday that the final provisions of the health care plan would be "posted for many days before this thing passes" to give the public a chance to review it.

The earliest the House could vote on the latest health bill is Sunday.
Click to expand...

OK, here we go folks. Might want to put all the good china away and lock the doors if this things passes.

Only 35 percent of Americans support the bill, according to Gallup.

FOXNews.com - Fox News Poll: 55% Oppose Health Care Reform
 
Washington (CNN) -- A long-awaited compromise health care bill drafted by top Democrats will cost $940 billion over the next 10 years, according to a preliminary analysis released Thursday by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

The bill cuts the deficit by $138 billion during that period of time, the Budget Office report said. It would further reduce the deficit by an additional $1.2 trillion in the following decade, two House Democratic sources told CNN.

The measure extends health insurance coverage to 32 million Americans, helping to guarantee that 95 percent of Americans will be covered, the sources said. It also reduces Medicare expenditures by 1.4 percent annually while extending Medicare's solvency by at least nine years, they added.

The release of the Congressional Budget Office estimate sets up a likely vote on passage of the health care bill Sunday. Democratic leaders have said the measure will be publicly available for 72 hours before any vote.


$94 billion a year. Sounds like a bargain.
 
USA-1 said:
$94 billion a year. Sounds like a bargain.
Click to expand...

Nancy said "this is just the beginning." There is no way for the CBO to even score what they plan to turn this into.

It'll be more like $940 billion per year for 10 years in the end.

And no one, absolutely no one, believes these numbers are accurate. The CBO doesn't even know what it's measuring. It's stupid to even try.
 
USA-1 said:
$94 billion a year. Sounds like a bargain.
Click to expand...

Are you under the impression that the coverage for these people would have a total cost (from all sources) of $94b/year?
 
Can anyone show a CBO Scored bill that was actually on budget over a ten year period?

Yeah, me neither.
 
MrVicchio said:
Can anyone show a CBO Scored bill that was actually on budget over a ten year period?

Yeah, me neither.
Click to expand...

The CBO's projections for the 10-year costs of Medicare Part D are actually right on target.

I don't think the fault really lies with the CBO on this. They made it quite clear in their letter than the first 10 years are a reasonable estimate and that everything past that is at best a rough guess. It's the Dems who are painting this as something more concrete.
 
Last edited:
RightinNYC said:
The CBO's projections for the 10-year costs of Medicare Part D are actually right on target.

I don't think the fault really lies with the CBO on this. They made it quite clear in their letter than the first 10 years are a reasonable estimate and that everything past that is at best a rough guess. It's the Dems who are painting this as something more concrete.
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to imply the CBO was at fault, rather the numbers rarely seem to work out right.

I'd love to read more on how the Medicare D numbers have stood up over time. Searching the web isn't something I am really able to do atm.
 
Would you guys be happy with the bill if it did only cost $94 billion a year?
That really is only a drop in the bucket compared to what the government wastes every year.
 
MrVicchio said:
I wasn't trying to imply the CBO was at fault, rather the numbers rarely seem to work out right.

I'd love to read more on how the Medicare D numbers have stood up over time. Searching the web isn't something I am really able to do atm.
Click to expand...

In Jan of 2004, the CBO looked at the projected costs of the first 10 years of Medicare Part D and concluded that it would be $534b. In Feb of 2009, the CBO looked at the first years of data and adjusted its projections to say that the total cost would be approximately $549b. For my money, that's close enough for government work.

USA-1 said:
Would you guys be happy with the bill if it did only cost $94 billion a year?
Click to expand...

It depends on what that $94b does.

That really is only a drop in the bucket compared to what the government wastes every year.
Click to expand...

Really? How exactly does the government "waste" hundreds of billions each year? If we're wasting that money, why don't we stop?
 
Redress said:
I live fear mongering.
Click to expand...

OK, let's fast forward to next Monday, and DEEM (pretend) that this thing passes.

What will be the atmosphere? I'm telling you, it ain't gonna be pretty.

I'm not predicting Rodney King verdict violence, but you are going to see a national uprising like you haven't seen in over a century.

Those town halls you saw last summer will seem like cub scout meetings compared to this.
 
Erod said:
OK, let's fast forward to next Monday, and DEEM (pretend) that this thing passes.

What will be the atmosphere? I'm telling you, it ain't gonna be pretty.

I'm not predicting violence, but you are going to see a national uprising like you haven't seen in over a century.

Those town halls you saw last summer will seem like cub scout meetings compared to this.
Click to expand...

Yeah, no controversial bill has ever passed before without rioting...

Get a grip.
 
USA-1 said:
Would you guys be happy with the bill if it did only cost $94 billion a year?
That really is only a drop in the bucket compared to what the government wastes every year.
Click to expand...

You do understand that the progam doesn't start for 4-5 years, right?

And this ain't gonna be the price tag, buddy. It'll be a lot higher. Not to mention, they've cut Medicare badly in this bill apparently.
 
Erod said:
I'm not predicting Rodney King verdict violence, but you are going to see a national uprising like you haven't seen in over a century.

Those town halls you saw last summer will seem like cub scout meetings compared to this.
Click to expand...

What makes you think this? I would be astonished if there's much of any response beyond what we've already seen.

Erod said:
Not like this. No it hasn't.

Name one.
Click to expand...

Er, our country's entrance into two wars, prompting millions of people to march? I don't remember rioting then.
 
Erod said:
You do understand that the progam doesn't start for 4-5 years, right?

And this ain't gonna be the price tag, buddy. It'll be a lot higher. Not to mention, they've cut Medicare badly in this bill apparently.
Click to expand...

Do you have any proof of this or is it just a partisan opinion?
What's wrong with cutting medicare, anyway?
 
RightinNYC said:
What makes you think this? I would be astonished if there's much of any response beyond what we've already seen.



Er, our country's entrance into two wars, prompting millions of people to march? I don't remember rioting then.
Click to expand...

Those wars weren't passed by reconciliation.

Actually, as long as they go the reconciliation route, I don't see much of a problem. Republicans can present amendment after amendment after amendment ad nauseum until the mid-terms get here, then they can kill it.

That's assuming it passes, of course, which is highly questionable.
 
Erod said:
Those wars weren't passed by reconciliation.

Actually, as long as they go the reconciliation route, I don't see much of a problem. Republicans can present amendment after amendment after amendment ad nauseum until the mid-terms get here, then they can kill it.

That's assuming it passes, of course, which is highly questionable.
Click to expand...

Do you think that the average person who protested against the wars or who will protest against this is mostly angry about reconciliation, or just generally opposed to the program in question?
 
USA-1 said:
Do you have any proof of this or is it just a partisan opinion?
What's wrong with cutting medicare, anyway?
Click to expand...

It's common knowledge.

I'm all for cutting medicare; we should have never started it in the first place, but you're going to really tick a lot of people off. How can they cut medicare if it's under-funded already?
 
RightinNYC said:
What makes you think this? I would be astonished if there's much of any response beyond what we've already seen.



Er, our country's entrance into two wars, prompting millions of people to march? I don't remember rioting then.
Click to expand...

I think the biggest response will be in November.
 
Erod said:
It's common knowledge.

I'm all for cutting medicare; we should have never started it in the first place, but you're going to really tick a lot of people off. How can they cut medicare if it's under-funded already?
Click to expand...

Common knowledge? :roll: Only if you get all your knowledge from Rush or Glenn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom