Health Care vote

PA and Ohio Congressman have been identified as a possible members to change their previous yes votes to no on the health care debacle currently going on in Congress. Please take time to call your representatives and let them know how you feel about this incredible attack on our personal liberties. Did you hear they plan on going ahead with this bill even through they haven't voted on it per Article 1 section 7 of the Constitution? That alone is reason enough to make the call. It's now obvious that is not about health care, it never was. If it were they would be working in the frame work of the Constitution! It's about power and control over you and your children's life style. Make the call. Lisa

Was it my imagination or did I hear last night that even if all this Health care reform gets it's required votes,that it will not take effect for four years--I heard it on the news after coverage of BO's trip to Ohio???On my life planning schedule,that should make me DEAD---Oh whooopeeee Jim Seward is our rep in this area,I don't beleive he his going w/ this nonsense--Lisa,you up late or startin early

lowfog01 wrote: Did you hear they plan on going ahead with this bill even through they haven't voted on it per Article 1 section 7 of the Constitution? That alone is reason enough to make the call. If it were they would be working in the frame work of the Constitution! It's about power and control over you and your Lisa

Actually, they have.

The House passed a bill with a majority, then the Senate passed a version that they wrote by a 60 to 40 vote super majority. Then they will send it to the President.

Now the House is set to pass the Senate bill..

This is the procedure the Constitution calls for in Article 1 section 7.

The Senate will then write and pass using budget reconciliation rules a bill to make changes to the bill they passed (with a super majority) earlier and send it to the house where they will pass the bill and send it to the President.

This is all called for in the Constitution.

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

I do not feel that my personal liberty is under attack. The fundamental choice is do I get screwed by an insurance company
or the government? At this point, I will take a shot with the government, at least I have a chance to fire them! When it comes to health care, you have no liberty. All this talk of market is BS. What we have now is a private system covering the public.
Cost shifting is nothing but a huge tax imposed not by the gov but by private insures and the providers that are continually squeezed. Next time you get ANY medical service, ask the person providing said service" hey, what does this cost?" The ans
is just one more example of the fun in dysfunction.
How many lives did the people in underwriting save today?

You should know this Paulie from living here ........ but the dems are in bed with the insurance industry. Why do you think they cannot wait to ram this bill down our throats? Deval Patrick himself is an ex-insurance guy.

freetown fred wrote:Was it my imagination or did I hear last night that even if all this Health care reform gets it's required votes,that it will not take effect for four years--I heard it on the news after coverage of BO's trip to Ohio???On my life planning schedule,that should make me DEAD---Oh whooopeeee Jim Seward is our rep in this area,I don't beleive he his going w/ this nonsense--Lisa,you up late or startin early

You heard right1 The only thing that takes effect right now will be the tax increases and any ensuing health insurance premium increase. That much has been all over the news. You'll feel that right away but any benefits don't start up until 2012 and beyond. If your guy isn't going with this mess, call and thank him.

I've been fighting this in my own district since day one but unfortunately, I have a congressman who follows Pelsoi so close he has to wipe the brown smudges off his nose when she stops suddenly. He refuses to meet with his constituents and only held town hall meetings in gated communities. Lisa

PA and Ohio Congressman have been identified as a possible members to change their previous yes votes to no on the health care debacle currently going on in Congress. Please take time to call your representatives and let them know how you feel about this incredible attack on our personal liberties. Did you hear they plan on going ahead with this bill even through they haven't voted on it per Article 1 section 7 of the Constitution? That alone is reason enough to make the call. It's now obvious that is not about health care, it never was. If it were they would be working in the frame work of the Constitution! It's about power and control over you and your children's life style. Make the call. Lisa

Beemerboy wrote "Actually, they have (voted)."

They have not voted on the Senate's version or amendment of the bill. If they had we would be able to go to the Congressional Recorder and get a list by name of those who voted yay or no on the amendment. That is what Article 1 Section 7 calls for. That is not what Pelosi is considering doing. If she can not get the votes she wants to forward the bill on a "self execution" or "deemed pass" motion. That means the house is saying since they already passed a bill on the same subject we are deeming that this one - the senate version is passed, too. All without a vote on the Senate's version or amendment. This is usually done for minor things like the opening day of the Congressional session. It has never been done with a bill that will "transform" the United States or that 70% of the country does not want. This bill. if passed, will destroy our economy and a health system while not perfect is the best in the world and to which everyone has access to via laws on the book.

Beemerboy wrote. "This is the procedure the Constitution calls for in Article 1 section 7."

No, it isn't. Show me the vote, tell me the yay and nays as called for in Article 1, section 7. What day did they vote on the senate version or amendment? If they try this round about they are not in compliance with the Constitution. This will end up in the courts faster then a jack rabbit.

Beemerboy wrote "Now the House is set to pass the Senate bill.."

That would be an up or down vote on the matter. That isn't what they are talking about doing. Pundits say it's 50/50 right now. They don't have the votes. If they had the votes they would have voted on it. That's why they are trying to figure out a way to go around the vote requirement in Article 1, Section 7 either with Reconciliation or the "as deemed" route.

Beemerboy wrote "The Senate will then write and pass using budget reconciliation rules a bill to make changes to the bill they passed (with a super majority) earlier and send it to the house where they will pass the bill and send it to the President.

You can not write a budget reconciliation bill for a law that hasn't been voted on and signed. A reconciliation is for making small changes to an existing budgetary law. Check out the Byrd rule for clarification. That says the Reconciliation can only occur on a Budget bill which this isn't. The Demo leadership is asking the Congress to Trust the senate that this will happen. That's not a given. The Congress will have to vote on the existing senate bill/amendment - which has major problems in it in their view - and hope that the changes will be made. That's why they are having problems getting the votes.

Breemerboy wrote "This is all called for in the Constitution."

No, it's not - see above - only if there is an up and down vote with the names and votes registered in the official record can this be forwarded to the President for signature. They don't have the votes to do it up front which why they are talking about other options.

Breemerboy wrote: " Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States;"

This hasn't been voted on by both the house and the senate therefore it hasn't passed the House of Representatives and the Senate - what they are trying to do is not in compliance with Article 1, Section 7 and that's pretty obvious. If forwarded to the president without a recorded vote in the House on the Senate version, this law will be unconstitutional.

Lisa

Paulie wrote:I do not feel that my personal liberty is under attack. The fundamental choice is do I get screwed by an insurance company or the government?

I'm sorry to hear that. I always think it's my business which doctor I see and what procedure me or one of my kids have. I guess I have a different view of personal liberty. It takes all kinds, I guess. Have a great day, the weather is beautiful here. Lisa

I`ve already called my Rep.s & told them to vote for the bill, thats about all I can do. There are enough scare tatics out there to shake a stick at, I just wish the Beltway Boys on both sides could be honest. As some say I guess its just not in their nature.

No scare tactics,Sam....Just the sad truth about how far we have declined as a Country. Hopefully,this can be defeated. Then a reasonable set of rails to run on can be crafted. Greed and a Human Cattle Mentality on one side,coupled with liberal sloth and a skewed sense of what a Constitutional Right is on the other side have brought us to this hardcore Country divider. We will be weaker for the having of it all,no matter who wins.......Sad...

samhill wrote:I`ve already called my Rep.s & told them to vote for the bill, thats about all I can do. There are enough scare tatics out there to shake a stick at, I just wish the Beltway Boys on both sides could be honest. As some say I guess its just not in their nature.

I'm sorry to hear that but that's your choice and I spent 16 years in the military defending your right to say it. Besides there's not much I could add that you haven't heard already. As you know I feel strongly the other way. There has been enough talk, let them vote in compliance with the constitution and see what the results are. Stop the bribes and attempted end arounds of the constitution and vote!

In the mean time, whether you're for or against this bill call and let your representative know. Lisa

. Bob,I'm pullin out of this topic--I don't think anyone could have put it more clearly & to the point then you just did---I salute you,Fred --------------- Also,well put Lisa!

Why I want H.C., heres my portion of health ins. for my wife, we got married in 04, in a large group plan.
01-31-05 $ 35.66 no problem
01-31-06 125.83 still not bad
01-31-07 225.93
01-31-08 290.62
01-31-09 364.19
01-31-10 470.55
do you still wonder why I am willing to try a new H.C. plan, I can`t afford what we have now & in July of this year my pension drops by $400.00/mo. This is not a Cadilac plan, I have to pay the first $1,000 before it even starts to kick in.

I spent 16 years in the military defending your right to say it.

That's a long time. Do you use Tri-Care?

Hi Samhill,

I can relate as I'm sure many others here can. We are stretched pretty thing here. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the Health Care Reform bill under consideration now isn't going to help with holding the cost down. For pete's sake even Dick Durbin admitted as much and so did the CBO. I predict we'll really hear folks howl when their taxes go up now but they can't get any benefits for 4 years. There are some things that could be done immediately that would bring the cost down and not cost anything to implement. Allowing insurance companies to sell policies over state lines is one. So is Tort Reform of some kind or another. Look to Texas as an example; more doctors are moving in and the overall costs of health care are going down remarkable. For the other side of the story look at MASS where you pay some of the highest premiums in the country for less services. The proposed bill follows Mass.. I am in favor of Health Insurance reform - just not at the expense of my personal liberties. This proposed bill is not about Health Care Insurance reform; it's about controlling your life from cradle to grave. Lisa