House repeals Obamacare 245-189; Dem calls Republicans "Nazis" on the House floor

[pocketfullofshells]

Whaa-aaaa-aaaaa--aaattt??

just go back to the kiddy pool

 

[PLC1]

I am pretty sure the Republicans in the House passed the bill because they object to the previous bill that was passed..

As for it "not going anywhere", that is irrelevant, it is not the place of members of the House to worry about politics in the Senate, the job of a member of the House is to work on and pass legislation in the House.

If it goes nowhere, and it won't, is not the point..

It is precisely the point. They know that the repeal is going nowhere. They know that something has to be done about health care, and soon, so they are taking a vote knowing that they can later point to the opposition with fingers of blame. If they actually passed a repeal, then they would have to be responsible for the results. As it is, they don't have to be responsible for anything. It's pure political grandstanding, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.

 

[Gipper]

It is precisely the point. They know that the repeal is going nowhere. They know that something has to be done about health care, and soon, so they are taking a vote knowing that they can later point to the opposition with fingers of blame. If they actually passed a repeal, then they would have to be responsible for the results. As it is, they don't have to be responsible for anything. It's pure political grandstanding, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.

No. You missed the point by a million miles...as usual.

The House should not allow fools who claim "it is a waste of time because it won't go anywhere" to affect how it does business. It did its job. It does not matter what the other branches of government do.

But, I do believe the Senate will vote on repealing this disastrous law. And if they vote to repeal and BO vetoes it, so be it.

The consequences of both houses voting against Obummercare and BO vetoing the repeal vote, could be most negative on the Dems. Always a good thing.

 

[BigRob]

It is precisely the point. They know that the repeal is going nowhere.

You are basically saying that the House should never hold a vote on legislation unless they clear it with the Senate and the President first... that is absurd.

They know that something has to be done about health care, and soon, so they are taking a vote knowing that they can later point to the opposition with fingers of blame.

Republicans in the House are in the process of writing their own healthcare "reform" legislation.

If they actually passed a repeal, then they would have to be responsible for the results. As it is, they don't have to be responsible for anything. It's pure political grandstanding, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.

Republicans in the House DID pass the repeal, and as such will be held responsible for it by their constituents.

You could make the exact same argument about Senator Reid not allowing a vote in the Senate... by doing this, he is ensuring that Senate Democrats do not have to face the responsibility of a repeal vote.

 

[BigRob]

Whaa-aaaa-aaaaa--aaattt??

For example, if a vote took place at 2:00 AM, I am not sure how that prevents you from looking at the vote record to see how members voted.

 

[PLC1]

You are basically saying that the House should never hold a vote on legislation unless they clear it with the Senate and the President first... that is absurd.

No, I'm saying that passing a bill knowing in advance that it will go nowhere is just political gamesmanship. Passing a bill with the expectation that it might not pass, or might be altered in the other house, can be part of the process of political compromise. Passing something just so they can later say, "See? Congrescritter X voted for/against this wonderful/terrible bill" is just political gamesmanship.

Republicans in the House are in the process of writing their own healthcare "reform" legislation.

Good. If they actually come up with something worthwhile, then even I will have to admit that there is more going on than a meaningless political crapfling. I'm not particularly optimistic, but who knows, my cynicism is wrong almost 10% of the time.

Republicans in the House DID pass the repeal, and as such will be held responsible for it by their constituents.

yes, they can say, "well, we tried, so anything bad that happens is the fault of the other party. More political gamesmanship.

You could make the exact same argument about Senator Reid not allowing a vote in the Senate... by doing this, he is ensuring that Senate Democrats do not have to face the responsibility of a repeal vote.

Yes, you could. It is not just the Republicans that engage in this sort of thing after all. At least there is something in Washington that is bipartisan.

 

[BigRob]

No, I'm saying that passing a bill knowing in advance that it will go nowhere is just political gamesmanship. Passing a bill with the expectation that it might not pass, or might be altered in the other house, can be part of the process of political compromise. Passing something just so they can later say, "See? Congrescritter X voted for/against this wonderful/terrible bill" is just political gamesmanship.

There are Republicans in the Senate who state the bill will get a vote in the Senate... who is to say that it will not?

Additionally, how do you expect to start the process of "political compromise" if the House just passes on the issue because the Senate might struggle with it?

Good. If they actually come up with something worthwhile, then even I will have to admit that there is more going on than a meaningless political crapfling. I'm not particularly optimistic, but who knows, my cynicism is wrong almost 10% of the time.

More worthwhile than what? The current legislation?

yes, they can say, "well, we tried, so anything bad that happens is the fault of the other party. More political gamesmanship.

Well they did try, which is what they were elected to do.... surely you cannot really fault a politician for playing some politics?

 

[PLC1]

There are Republicans in the Senate who state the bill will get a vote in the Senate... who is to say that it will not?

Additionally, how do you expect to start the process of "political compromise" if the House just passes on the issue because the Senate might struggle with it?

Struggle with it? there isn't going to be any struggle. It's dead in the Senate, and everyone knows it.

More worthwhile than what? The current legislation?

Yes, and the situation before any reform. If something isn't done to control costs, we're not going to be able to afford health care. I just found out that the policy the school district had when I retired now costs twice as much six years later, and that's on top of double digit increases that had been happening before.

Well they did try, which is what they were elected to do.... surely you cannot really fault a politician for playing some politics?

Playing some politics? Well, I suppose playing political games is to be expected, but this goes way beyond some politics. It's all a big partisan crapfling.

As for the Democrats, here's their position:

 

[BigRob]

Struggle with it? there isn't going to be any struggle. It's dead in the Senate, and everyone knows it.

I don't see how that is the House's issue.

Yes, and the situation before any reform. If something isn't done to control costs, we're not going to be able to afford health care. I just found out that the policy the school district had when I retired now costs twice as much six years later, and that's on top of double digit increases that had been happening before.

The current legislation does nothing to really control costs...aside from exempting hundreds of companies from compliance.

Playing some politics? Well, I suppose playing political games is to be expected, but this goes way beyond some politics. It's all a big partisan crapfling.

Is the healthcare bill a bad bill or not? If it is, then what is wrong with attempting to repeal it?

 

[PLC1]

I don't see how that is the House's issue.

Neither does the house, unless, of course, they're wiling to make a vote that they wouldn't if it had any chance of passing.

The current legislation does nothing to really control costs...aside from exempting hundreds of companies from compliance.

That's the biggest issue with the current law.

Is the healthcare bill a bad bill or not? If it is, then what is wrong with attempting to repeal it?

It's not necessarily a bad bill, but it doesn't address all the issues. It does make it possible for more people to have health care.

If we could have a real debate on the real issues, leaving out rantings about socialism and death panels, maybe a better bill could be passed.

If Congress is really serious about repealing "Obamacare", then they need to start by coming up with something better, not just going back what we had before reform. But, that would require a pragmatic approach to a complex problem, and wouldn't lend itself to partisan gamesmanship.

 

[Phoenix68]

House repeals Obamacare 245-189; Dem calls Republicans "Nazis" on the House floor​

.
December 7, 2022
.​

"In late November HHS said that nearly 3.4 million people had signed up for health plans. Last year, a total of around 14.5 million people signed up for insurance during the open enrollment period, the highest-ever number since the Affordable Care Act was passed in 2010."

.
​