• 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!

Rep. Weiner Wigs Out on Republicans

The Democrats are, for their part, looking for legislative achievements that they can take back to their constituents.

The Republicans are, for their part, trying to deny them any such achievements.

What interests me a lot more is this question: What does this legislation even do, and is it even necessary? The 9/11 responders have been 9/11 responders for, oh, almost 9 years now -- so why now?

It's hard to even find out what's in the bill. Beyond what Bubba posted, I can't find anything. Why now? Well, I think November sure has something to do with it. As does the fact that an 11,000 constituent class action suit has just wound its way through the courts. Why is it necessary? I don't know. While I do believe we should take good care of these people, they have access to a billion or more right now -- with the class action lawsuit settlement and additional insurance coverage. All of these first responders have excellent health benefits, excellent disability coverage, were paid a ton of money for their work, and, further, Worker's Compensation is in place to assist them with any work-related injuries/illnesses. Seems to me the government ought to streamline THAT process rather than throw another $7.4 billion at the problem.

Even as I post this, I know users will attack it. This is a very popular flag-waving Yankee Doodle bill. But the REAL question is whether or not it's necessary. Each will assess their damage this week and it'll come up for vote again, no doubt. Guess I'd agree with the article: No wonder the public's satisfaction index with Congress is 11%.
 
Have you not seen the arguments made to defend voting against this bill? Democrats 'forced' this bill. Democrats want to give money to illegal immigrants. Democrats want to give too much money to the 9/11 victims. The same Republicans who pimp out the 9/11 victims everytime they want to support the war in Iraq and Afghanistan are now telling us that the people who risked their lives trying to save others are getting too much money. The best part about it is MrVicchio posting a link about the GOP saying that this is an entitlement program. Oh well, I guess in his xenophobic America these people don't really deserve the money.

A) The 9-11 responders already have the best medical insurance in the country if not the world so what is this bill for?

B) Actual victims of 9-11 have already been financially compensated with appx. $3.5 million going to each civilian killed or seriously inured and $4.6 million going to each first responder killed or seriously injured.
 
The 9-11 responders worked for the city, they already have the best medical insurance in the country. So the assertions that this money was to help with their medical expenses is bull****.

so, your position is that every person who was a 9/11 responder was a city employee who is eligible to use health insurance provided by the city of new york
just wanting to clarify that so i can point out where that may not always be the circumstance, such that there are those who are without adequte health coverage, who need assistance taking care of the health problems caused by the 9/11 rescue efforts
 
What Rep. Weiner did with his outrage was to make it crystal clear to the American public that it is the Republicans who are against this potential popular legislation. Who could be against the 911 first responders? Silly me, the Republicans of course. The Repulicans play this game all the time.

The Republican plan was to add a phony "poison pill" amendment that would anger Hispanics – a key Democratic constituency.


Too classic. Maybe we should bump it up to $10 billion and include "all the hungry children"? Who could be against hungry children?

And what about all the cute puppies out there? What kind of cold hearted prick doesn't love baby dogs? Another $5 billion for the pups!!

Who's with me here???!!! LETS DO IT FOR THE BABIES AND ALL THOSE FRIGGING PUPPIES....!!!!



.
 
Excerpted with my emphasis from “Anthony Weiner rant reveals why nobody likes Congress” By Scott Bland, Contributor, “the vote blog,” The Christian Science Monitor, July 30, 2010
[SIZE="+2"]M[/SIZE]ake no mistake, the Zadroga Act is very popular on both sides of the aisle: It has 115 co-sponsors in the House, including 15 Republicans. The bill would set aside money to pay the health-care costs for first responders to the 9/11 attacks in New York City, many of whom deal with respiratory issues caused by the dust and debris that day.

Yet on Thursday, only 12 Republicans voted for the bill, and it failed.

Why?

Politics.

Republicans refused to support the bill blaming the procedure for passage, not the bill itself.

You can try and blame Democrats for using a procedure that prevented Republicans from adding a poison pill to the bill; but, that begs the question why were Republicans trying to add a poison pill to a popular bill in the first place?

Politics.

Republicans were playing politics with a popular bill that provided health care to 9-11 first responders.

I don't see Democrats being to blame for Republican antics. In fact, I see only Republicans to blame for once again harming American interests to serve their own selfish political ambitions.

Thank you, Congressman Wiener for drawing Americans' attention to the perversity of Republican political tactics on display these days in Washington, D.C.
 
Last edited:
so, your position is that every person who was a 9/11 responder was a city employee who is eligible to use health insurance provided by the city of new york
just wanting to clarify that so i can point out where that may not always be the circumstance, such that there are those who are without adequte health coverage, who need assistance taking care of the health problems caused by the 9/11 rescue efforts

And just to clarify what your position seems to be: Of that select group of first responders who may not now have sufficient coverage (nine years after the tragedy), you think that seven thousand million dollars sounds like a reasonable amount to cover the shortfall, correct??

And you are comfortable with what appears to be a relatively vague bill and zero discussion in congress to weigh the dollar amounts and the value of the legislation. Please straighten me out where i got any of that wrong....

.
 
The Democrats claim that the bill will help 9/11 people. They make that claim in hopes that it gives them immunity to any criticism. They spin and try to paint Republicans as the "party of hating people" because they didn't support Democrats. Democrats also claimed that the stimulus would not allow unemployment from rising above 8%. They called Republicans evil people because they asked about funding in regards to extending unemployment benefits. The Democrats write a bill, claim it does "x" wonderful thing, and anyone who opposes it hates "x" people and is a wretched person. Don't buy into their deception.
 
You can try and blame Democrats for using a procedure that prevented Republicans from adding a poison pill to the bill; but, that begs the question why were Republicans trying to add a poison pill to a popular bill in the first place?

Both sides are playing politics.
 
Both sides are playing politics.

You can keep on repeating that but it doesn't answer the question why Republicans were attempting to attach a poison pill to a bill popular on both sides of the aisle. Try to blame Democrats all you want, but it was Republicans who derailed this effort to aid 9-11 first responders.
 
You can keep on repeating that but it doesn't answer the question why Republicans were attempting to attach a poison pill to a bill popular on both sides of the aisle. Try to blame Democrats all you want, but it was Republicans who derailed this effort to aid 9-11 first responders.

Me thinks you should study who really is putting poison into bills... Or more like the bills themselves are parasites to the federal budget.
 
You can keep on repeating that but it doesn't answer the question why Republicans were attempting to attach a poison pill to a bill popular on both sides of the aisle. Try to blame Democrats all you want, but it was Republicans who derailed this effort to aid 9-11 first responders.

And the children, boy those poor kids, they are not getting anything. What about the kids, lets do it for the kids. Come on, I think you have made enough money, its for the first reponders, gees you heartless ba***ds
 
The Democrats are, for their part, looking for legislative achievements that they can take back to their constituents.

The Republicans are, for their part, trying to deny them any such achievements.

What interests me a lot more is this question: What does this legislation even do, and is it even necessary? The 9/11 responders have been 9/11 responders for, oh, almost 9 years now -- so why now?

You might be interested that Rep. Peter King is one of bills sponsors and voted for it. Anyway here is the skinny on the bill:
H.R. 847 otherwise known as the “James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act”, and even better known as the “James Zadroga Act” was introduced in February of 2009. It was formulated and introduced in the current session of Congress by Congresswoman Carolyn B. Maloney, representative of the 14th District of New York (Manhattan and Queens) along with Representatives Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Peter King (R-NY) and Michael McMahon. The Senate companion bill (S. 1334) was introduced on July 24, 2009 by Senators Gillibrand, Schumer, Lautenberg, and Menendez; this was the first time comprehensive 9/11 health legislation had been introduced in the Senate. It is best to first answer the question “what is the problem?” in order to understand H.R. 847. So, what is the problem? The problem delves deeper than just the respiratory illnesses that are reportedly affecting thousand of 9/11 rescue and recovery workers. Thousands of 9/11 responders exposed to an amount of toxins at Ground Zero - that has never been seen before – are now very sick and in need of help. Those that are sick include previously blogged about New York firefighters and police officers, EMTs, construction workers, clean-up workers, residents, and area workers, among many others. Their reported illnesses are far ranging as they include respiratory and gastrointestinal system conditions such as asthma, interstitial lung disease, the chronic “WTC” cough, leukemia, cancers, sarcoma, lymphoma, and mental health conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). At the point that H.R. 847 was formulated and introduced, it was reported that more than 13,000 WTC responders are deceased or sick and receiving treatment. It has also been reported that over 40,000 responders are currently in medical monitoring at facilities like Mount Sinai’s World Trade Center Medical Monitoring and Treatment Program, which officially loses all funding in June 2010, this summer. Additionally, it has been reported that 71,000 individuals are enrolled in the WTC health registry, indicating that they were exposed to toxins. Congresswoman Maloney also presents the problem that many of those who have suffered the reported WTC-related illnesses have also suffered economic losses, thus she (and the bill) believes that they “need and deserve compensation”.



For those who refer to 9/11 as a “New York Problem” (trust me, I had NO idea but it is far more prevalent that I could have imagined. Honestly, it’s quite scary) at least 10,000 people came from around the country to help in the aftermath of the attacks. They hail from every state in the Union and nearly every Congressional District. Many of them are reportedly sick and very concerned about their health.



Now that I have addressed the problem at length, let’s try to answer the question, “How does the 9/11 Health and Compensation Act address the problem?” The Act would provide medical monitoring and treatment to WTC responders and community members who were exposed to the toxins at Ground Zero. The act would also build upon the existing monitory and treatment program. One such example would be the current program at the WTC Center of Mount Sinai. The Act would also reopen the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund (VCF) to provide compensation for economic losses and harm as an alternative to the current litigation system. Finally the Act would provide liability protection for the WTC Contractors and the City of New York who are reportedly being sued by over 10,000 people who claim to be sick from the Ground Zero conditions and elements.
What is H.R. 847, The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act? - OnEarth Magazine
 
so, your position is that every person who was a 9/11 responder was a city employee who is eligible to use health insurance provided by the city of new york
just wanting to clarify that so i can point out where that may not always be the circumstance, such that there are those who are without adequte health coverage, who need assistance taking care of the health problems caused by the 9/11 rescue efforts

This bill only goes to aid first responders, which first responders were not working for the city?
 
Too classic. Maybe we should bump it up to $10 billion and include "all the hungry children"? Who could be against hungry children?

And what about all the cute puppies out there? What kind of cold hearted prick doesn't love baby dogs? Another $5 billion for the pups!!

Who's with me here???!!! LETS DO IT FOR THE BABIES AND ALL THOSE FRIGGING PUPPIES....!!!!



.

You left out the Kittens you cold hearted bastard. What would Jebus say?
 
This bill only goes to aid first responders, which first responders were not working for the city?

Not correct.

From the bill.

SEC. 3021. IDENTIFICATION AND INITIAL HEALTH EVALUATION OF ELIGIBLE WTC COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

`(a) Eligible WTC Community Member Defined-

`(1) IN GENERAL- In this title, the term `eligible WTC community member' means, subject to paragraphs (3) and (5), an individual who claims symptoms of a WTC-related health condition and is described in any of the following subparagraphs:

`(A) CURRENTLY IDENTIFIED COMMUNITY MEMBER- An individual, including an eligible WTC responder, who has been identified as eligible for medical treatment or monitoring by the WTC Environmental Health Center as of the date of enactment of this title.

`(B) COMMUNITY MEMBER WHO MEETS CURRENT ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA- An individual who is not an eligible WTC responder and meets any of the current eligibility criteria described in a subparagraph of paragraph (2).

`(C) COMMUNITY MEMBER WHO MEETS MODIFIED ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA- An individual who is not an eligible WTC responder and meets such eligibility criteria relating to exposure to airborne toxins, other hazards, or adverse conditions resulting from the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center as the WTC Administrator determines eligible, after consultation with the WTC Community Program Steering Committee, Coordinating Centers of Excellence described in section 3006(b)(1)(C), and the WTC Scientific/Technical Advisory Committee.

The Administrator shall not modify such criteria under subparagraph (C) on or after the date that the number of certifications for eligible community members has reached 80 percent of the limit described in paragraph (5) or on or after the date that the number of certifications for eligible responders has reached 80 percent of the limit described in section 3021(a)(5).

`(2) CURRENT ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA- The eligibility criteria described in this paragraph for an individual are that the individual is described in any of the following subparagraphs:

`(A) A person who was present in the New York City disaster area in the dust or dust cloud on September 11, 2001.

`(B) A person who worked, resided or attended school, child care or adult day care in the New York City disaster area for--

`(i) at least four days during the 4-month period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on January 10, 2002; or

`(ii) at least 30 days during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on July 31, 2002.

`(C) Any person who worked as a clean-up worker or performed maintenance work in the New York City disaster area during the 4-month period described in subparagraph (B)(i) and had extensive exposure to WTC dust as a result of such work.

`(D) A person who was deemed eligible to receive a grant from the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation Residential Grant Program, who possessed a lease for a residence or purchased a residence in the New York City disaster area, and who resided in such residence during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on May 31, 2003.

`(E) A person whose place of employment--

`(i) at any time during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on May 31, 2003, was in the New York City disaster area; and

`(ii) was deemed eligible to receive a grant from the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation WTC Small Firms Attraction and Retention Act program or other government incentive program designed to revitalize the Lower Manhattan economy after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.

Bill Text - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
 
Not correct.


Interesting point. Have only read a couple of sections. But it appears that anyone/everyone that lived within miles of ground zero is a candidate for compensation.

If this bill eventually passes, it would be fascinating to see how the payouts are managed and monitored.

....$7,000,000,000. Unfunded by Congress. Nine years after the WTC attack. But the bill/title and Weinerspeak seems to be all about First Responders.

Devil is always in those pesky details.....



.
 
Interesting point. Have only read a couple of sections. But it appears that anyone/everyone that lived within miles of ground zero is a candidate for compensation.

If this bill eventually passes, it would be fascinating to see how the payouts are managed and monitored.

....$7,000,000,000. Unfunded by Congress. Nine years after the WTC attack. But the bill/title and Weinerspeak seems to be all about First Responders.

Devil is always in those pesky details.....



.
here are some estimates of those who will qualify for assistance
... The number of workers that have registered with area hospitals' Ground Zero programs has reached 37,000. With about 500 new workers registering each month, the institute estimated that the number of registrants could reach 65,000 in two years. ...
Health effects arising from the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Interesting point. Have only read a couple of sections. But it appears that anyone/everyone that lived within miles of ground zero is a candidate for compensation.

If this bill eventually passes, it would be fascinating to see how the payouts are managed and monitored.

....$7,000,000,000. Unfunded by Congress. Nine years after the WTC attack. But the bill/title and Weinerspeak seems to be all about First Responders.

Devil is always in those pesky details.....
.

Actually it is funded. I could not find the actual text in the bill but here is the CBO report.

Title III would change tax provisions that in some cases allow a U.S.
subsidiary of a foreign corporation to avoid U.S. withholding tax on
payments to a related subsidiary in a country that has a tax treaty with the
United States. Staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation estimate that the
change would increase revenues by about $7.4 billion over the 2011-2020
period. In addition, the legislation would shift about $1.8 billion in
revenues from 2016 to 2015 by temporarily changing the required amounts
of quarterly estimated tax payments of large corporations.


Congressional Budget Office - Cost Estimates
 
Actually it is funded. I could not find the actual text in the bill but here is the CBO report.




Congressional Budget Office - Cost Estimates

That would be good news. Funding is nice (if it actually happens)

Am not that familiar with reading through a congressional bill. Do you know where the section is that actually breaks down the $7,000,000,000? With a sum of that amount would guess/hope/pray there is some specific accounting of just how they arrived at that number....


.
 
Have you not seen the arguments made to defend voting against this bill? Democrats 'forced' this bill. Democrats want to give money to illegal immigrants. Democrats want to give too much money to the 9/11 victims. The same Republicans who pimp out the 9/11 victims everytime they want to support the war in Iraq and Afghanistan are now telling us that the people who risked their lives trying to save others are getting too much money. The best part about it is MrVicchio posting a link about the GOP saying that this is an entitlement program. Oh well, I guess in his xenophobic America these people don't really deserve the money.

Please stop using big words you do not understand.

Mr V does not advocate pulling out of all countries and does not support cutting ties with all interests outside the country.

You are only embarassing yourself when you use that word incorrectly.
 
You can keep on repeating that but it doesn't answer the question why Republicans were attempting to attach a poison pill to a bill popular on both sides of the aisle. Try to blame Democrats all you want, but it was Republicans who derailed this effort to aid 9-11 first responders.

Republicans tried to attach something for the same reason the Democrats shut down attachments on the gamble that the Republicans wouldn't dare oppose the bill -- both sides are so busy trying to blow their load in the other's face that their actual duties are being forgotten in the fray.
 
no surprise, you guessed wrong again

the change was because the GOP insisted on using the bill for political advantage, by introducing an amendment which would deny any authorized funds for illegal aliens
to avoid that political detour, the demos had to engage another process requiring a super majority
94% of the demos voted to approve funding for the health care of the 9/11 responders
only 12 republicans supported the measure - causing it to fail

btw, this has been posted previously, but from your reply it was apparent you chose not to read it

So, the Democrats are showing their love for illegal immigrants so much that they were willing to ditch the 9/11 responders on the side of the road to show illegals that the Dems support them...

Of course, this is just another example of how the Dems want it their way or the highway, enacting procedures in an effort to prevent ANY INPUT at all from Republicans. SOP for the Dems... we all know that...
 
Back
Top Bottom