• 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!

9/11 First responders speak out on 'Daily Show'

repeter

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
3,445
Reaction score
682
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
9/11 First responders speak out on 'Daily Show'

Stewart has been hitting the general media silence around the first responders and the pending legislation that would help to alleviate their health and financial difficulties for much of the past week. Last night's panel discussion took more direct aim at congressional inaction on the measure -- and the Senate Republicans' filibuster in particular. This marked one of the only occasions the satiric cable show featured a panel discussion, and through most of the nine-minute segment, Stewart's demeanor was uncharacteristically somber, as he sought to give the bulk of the airtime to his guests.

I don't even know what to say about this...
 
I saw part of it. I hope there is a rerun so I can see it all.

I have nothing but respect for them.
 
I watched that long spiel on Fox News by that one dude about how terrible it was that this bill had been blocked.

Never once did he mention the Republican party. "Congress." "The Senate." As if it weren't a 100% party line vote on part of the GOP that did it...
 
Ok, I'm a bit ignorant on this subject but...wouldn't thier health care coverage that they more than likely have through the city to begin with (police, fire dept, etc etc) cover these things? Why isn't it if it is not? One would think that the city of New York would gladly foot the bill for any medical expenses incurred due to the selfless actions of these modern day heroes. While they are footing the bill they are the ones that should be petitioning the government for help with those bills instead of these gentlemen and others like them. If worse came to worse I don't see why the city of NY couldn't sue the federal government for letting those bastards through. (if McD's can be sued over happy meal toys I see no reason that people couldn't sue for something like this...at least this would be more of a valid reason)

Well..just my two
penny.gif
penny.gif
 
Ok, I'm a bit ignorant on this subject but...wouldn't thier health care coverage that they more than likely have through the city to begin with (police, fire dept, etc etc) cover these things? Why isn't it if it is not? One would think that the city of New York would gladly foot the bill for any medical expenses incurred due to the selfless actions of these modern day heroes. While they are footing the bill they are the ones that should be petitioning the government for help with those bills instead of these gentlemen and others like them. If worse came to worse I don't see why the city of NY couldn't sue the federal government for letting those bastards through. (if McD's can be sued over happy meal toys I see no reason that people couldn't sue for something like this...at least this would be more of a valid reason)

Well..just my two
penny.gif
penny.gif

Health insurance company says it was work-related, falls under workman's comp.
Workman's comp says you can't prove it was work-related. People get cancer all the time how do you know the dust caused it?
Then they have to go to court, takes years, people die in the meantime... They're fighting tooth and nail for every penny.
 
Health insurance company says it was work-related, falls under workman's comp.
Workman's comp says you can't prove it was work-related. People get cancer all the time how do you know the dust caused it?
Then they have to go to court, takes years, people die in the meantime... They're fighting tooth and nail for every penny.

Jesus H. Christ.
 
Health insurance company says it was work-related, falls under workman's comp.
Workman's comp says you can't prove it was work-related. People get cancer all the time how do you know the dust caused it?
Then they have to go to court, takes years, people die in the meantime... They're fighting tooth and nail for every penny.

I don't believe that and would ask you for a link.

Health insurance is health insurance. I'm also quite sure they've got the best disability insurance on planet earth. There is more to this story...
 
I don't believe that and would ask you for a link.

Health insurance is health insurance. I'm also quite sure they've got the best disability insurance on planet earth. There is more to this story...

.... it's from the interview that Stewart did.

I take it you've never had to deal with a private insurance company during a serious illness? They literally employ people who have the sole job of finding reasons to deny claims.
 
Last edited:
I just saw the show. Stewart does like to hold the absurd and outrageous up to the light of day for everyone to see, and this is as outrageous as it gets.

One of the first responders reported having been let go for being "too expensive." The expense was a direct result of his work related illness, of course.

The house passed a bill to help them, but the Senate can't because it is being held hostage by threat of a filibuster. This is pathetic, and an example of government at its worst.
 
I just saw the show. Stewart does like to hold the absurd and outrageous up to the light of day for everyone to see, and this is as outrageous as it gets.

One of the first responders reported having been let go for being "too expensive." The expense was a direct result of his work related illness, of course.

The house passed a bill to help them, but the Senate can't because it is being held hostage by threat of a filibuster. This is pathetic, and an example of government at its worst.

Would help if you called out who/what party is filibustering it...
 
from Dittohead Not

This is pathetic, and an example of government at its worst.

Actually, it is a perfect example of Republican ideology and tactics at their worst.
 
Would help if you called out who/what party is filibustering it...

I seriously had someone on facebook rant about the Democrats blocking the 9/11 first responders bill. He had watched that bit on Fox News where they never mentioned the Republicans and went and assumed it was Democrats. (because Democrats forgot 9/11 amiright? :roll: )

I posted a link to a couple articles that showed it was a party line vote. No response. I think his brain broke.
 
I watched that long spiel on Fox News by that one dude about how terrible it was that this bill had been blocked.

Never once did he mention the Republican party. "Congress." "The Senate." As if it weren't a 100% party line vote on part of the GOP that did it...
So, since all the Dems support it, it MUST by definition be a good bill overall, right? I mean, the Dems couldn't possibly support a bill with problems, now could they???

Well, yes.. they could.

H.R. 847: James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010 - Legislative Digest - GOP.gov
Some Members may be concerned about several issues:



1. H.R. 847 creates a new entitlement program.
2. H.R. 847 is paid for with a tax increase on companies located in the United States that are employing American workers.
3. H.R. 847 is not means tested. An amendment to preclude millionaires from accessing the new health entitlement created by Title I was defeated during the markup in Energy and Commerce Committee.
4. NIOSH does not have expertise in administering a health care payment program. The current program is a block-grant program, and under H.R. 847, NIOSH will negotiate contracts and approve treatment protocols.
5. H.R. 847 increases hospital reimbursement rates to 140 percent of Medicare reimbursement rates on average for New York City hospitals while ObamaCare cuts $150 billion in payments to hospitals around the country.
6. H.R. 847 does not reward hospitals and providers for improving health care. They will be reimbursed based on each service they perform, which will encourage overutilization and increase health care spending.
7. Currently, several programs receive federal funding for medical monitoring and treatment programs. Those programs include: Fire Department of New York WTC Medical Monitoring Program, New York/New Jersey WTC Consortium, WTC Health Registry, WTC Federal Responder Screening Program, Project COPE, and POPPA (Police Organization Providing Peer Assistance) program.
8. Limited oversight fails to ensure taxpayer funds are spent properly and effectively. Government health care programs, such as Medicare, have a significant amount of fraud.
9. H.R. 847 gives too much discretion in the unreviewable authority of the Special Master.
10. H.R. 847 permits claimants to seek compensation through the VCF even if they have settled their lawsuits against the $1 billion taxpayer-funded World Trade Center Captive Insurance Company.
11. H.R. 847 includes protections for trial lawyers, including the ability to receive taxpayer-funded compensation for work not directly related to recovery from the VCF. In addition, attorneys who have been compensation under another settlement will have access to settlement funds under the reopened VCF.
12. 12. H.R. 847 extends the geographic scope of the original September 11 Fund and gives the Special Master discretion to extend it even farther.
13. H.R. 847 caps the VCF at $8.4 billion, which is an invitation and a guarantee to spend $8.4 billion.
Fix the problems, and I believe the GOP would support the bill. Don't fix the problems, go ahead and whine like little girls.
 
.... it's from the interview that Stewart did.

I take it you've never had to deal with a private insurance company during a serious illness? They literally employ people who have the sole job of finding reasons to deny claims.

You would take it wrong. I've purchased my own private insurance my whole life. This last year saw me use, probably, $75K in benefits. I totally get it. There's more to this story -- like the quality of the bill itself.

So, since all the Dems support it, it MUST by definition be a good bill overall, right? I mean, the Dems couldn't possibly support a bill with problems, now could they???

Well, yes.. they could.

H.R. 847: James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010 - Legislative Digest - GOP.gov

Fix the problems, and I believe the GOP would support the bill. Don't fix the problems, go ahead and whine like little girls.

Nice post. And I agree.
 
Jesus Christ they just called funding healthcare for 9/11 first responders "an entitlement program." That's it. That was a stand-alone criticism.
The "tax increase" on US companies is closing loopholes that allow companies to evade taxes.
They say the reimbursement rates are 140% of Medicare reimbursement and criticize Obamacare for cutting those reimbursements. Which is it?
"Does not reward hospitals and providers for improving healthcare." Funny, we tried that with Obamacare and they called it death panels.

Tell me, what should we fix, exactly?
 
So, since all the Dems support it, it MUST by definition be a good bill overall, right? I mean, the Dems couldn't possibly support a bill with problems, now could they???

Well, yes.. they could.

H.R. 847: James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010 - Legislative Digest - GOP.gov

Fix the problems, and I believe the GOP would support the bill. Don't fix the problems, go ahead and whine like little girls.

Sounds to me like the Republicans just spilled the biggest load of crap since that manure truck emptied out on Biff in BACK TO THE FUTURE.
 
Really? That's the 'best' the liberal/democratic leaning posters have to offer when I show WHY the Republicans blocked this bill? Deuce and Hay?

Deuce at least made an effort to discuss the subject, for which he deserves credit. But Hay? Really? That's you're in-depth, well thought out contribution to the thread? A Back to the Future reference?

I guess when confronted by reality, the libs/dems crumble like sand castles.

How sad.
 
"Does not reward hospitals and providers for improving healthcare." Funny, we tried that with Obamacare and they called it death panels.
What the **** does 'improving healthcare' have to do with death panels? You're sounding more than a little silly here.
 
The Democrats had two years to pass any lil' bills their hearts desired. Suddenly, it's urgent to pass this bill right now!!! Suddenly they say, "This isn't the time to talk, this is the time for action." They had plenty of time for action.

Find the freakin' money to fund the bill!!!!!
 
The Democrats had two years to pass any lil' bills their hearts desired. Suddenly, it's urgent to pass this bill right now!!! Suddenly they say, "This isn't the time to talk, this is the time for action." They had plenty of time for action.

Find the freakin' money to fund the bill!!!!!

If they're afraid that the congress can't pass a bill to provide health care for first responders, what does that say about the incoming Senators and Representatives?
 
If they're afraid that the congress can't pass a bill to provide health care for first responders, what does that say about the incoming Senators and Representatives?

The Dems are not afraid that congress cannot pass a bill... they are afraid the incoming congress will not pass 'their' kind of bills.
 
Looks like the Dems are actually listening to the GOP for once...

9/11 Responders Health Care Bill Appears Close to Passage in Senate - FoxNews.com

"We are on the verge of a Christmas miracle," said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.

Gillibrand and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., are offering a less-costly alternative to the original bill to aid 9/11 responders and survivors, saying that they believe it will gain needed support from the GOP...

Republicans have raised concerns about the original bill's cost and how to pay for it. The new bill's cost is scaled back from $7.4 billion over 10 years to $6.2 billion...

The original bill would have required multinational companies incorporated in tax havens to pay taxes on income earned in the U.S. Bill supporters said that would close a tax loophole, but Republicans have branded it a corporate tax increase.

Instead, the new bill would be paid for with a fee on some foreign firms that get U.S. government procurement contracts. The bill also calls for extending fees on certain firms that rely on H-1B and L-1 visas. It would also extend fees on travelers who don't present visa travel documents at U.S. airports.

Schumer said he believed the new provisions to pay for the bill would be "noncontroversial" with other lawmakers.
 
.... it's from the interview that Stewart did.

I take it you've never had to deal with a private insurance company during a serious illness? They literally employ people who have the sole job of finding reasons to deny claims.
Apparently they also employ people that approve claims since payment eventually get to hospitals and doctors.
 
Back
Top Bottom