printHow interesting that among the health-care-overall “ideas” coming from the Right, Obama is eager to consider the use of “undercover investigators” “to fight waste and fraud in federal health programs.” [WSJ]
Looking to push the “long and wrenching debate” over health care into its final stages, President Barack Obama asked lawmakers to schedule a vote on overhaul legislation “in the next few weeks.”
“No matter which approach you favor, I believe the United States Congress owes the American people a final vote on health-care reform,” Mr. Obama said Wednesday in remarks at the White House. “We have debated this issue thoroughly, not just for a year, but for decades.”
President Obama outlines his three-part proposal for health care reform in an address at the White House.
The president called for an “up-or-down vote,” likely opening the way for Democrats to use the budget reconciliation process to pass the legislation without Republican support.
The White House’s plan purports to expand health insurance to about 31 million Americans and is estimated to cost $950 billion over a decade. [For a realistic appraisal of the uninsured read “Destroying Healthcare For The Few Uninsured.”]
Curious too is BO’s support for reconciliation in passing his hulking health care bill. Reconciliation “is a procedure that allows the Senate to pass a bill with a simple majority, without needing 60 votes to override a filibuster.”
Both Republicans and Democrats have abused the procedure originated by a man I have great respect for: the elderly, ailing Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV). Last year Byrd issued this warning:
“I oppose using the budget reconciliation process to pass health care reform and climate change legislation…. As one of the authors of the reconciliation process, I can tell you that the ironclad parliamentary procedures it authorizes were never intended for this purpose.”
“But there is a big catch: Anything that is in a budget bill has to have a budget purpose. If not, the provision can be challenged under the ‘Byrd rule,’ named for Sen. Robert Byrd, the West Virginia Democrat.” [WSJ]
The president, as has been observed, is avoiding the use of the term reconciliation, instead calling for a simple ‘up or down vote.'” Big Daddy has emphasized his urge to come between Americans and the horrible health care insurance industry.
For their part, the Republicans did not want their ideas incorporated into the Bill. “Instead of passing a sweeping bill, Republicans say Congress should pass incremental legislation to curb medical malpractice lawsuits, allow insurers to sell policies across state lines and create high-risk pools for sick consumers to obtain coverage. They point to a House bill they unveiled last year with these provisions.” [WSJ]
Updated (March 4): Via the Campaign For Liberty:
“In the Virginia House of Delegates with a bipartisan vote of 70–29 (and currently advocating for its passage in the Senate), VA C4L has been closely working with state legislators to pass legislation nullifying any federal health insurance mandate and shielding Virginians from paying any penalties for not purchasing federally-approved health care.
SB 417, the Virginia Healthcare Freedom Act, passed in February with wide bipartisan support, and Governor McDonnell is expected to sign the legislation soon. Meanwhile, newly-elected pro-liberty Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is reportedly chomping at the bit to litigate Virginia’s sovereign rights should Washington pass some form of ObamaCare.
In Arizona, HCR 2014, the Health Care Freedom Act, passed the Arizona Legislature in 2009 and will be on the November 2010 ballot.
On February 17, C4L Vice President of Programs Matt Hawes appeared before the Maryland State Senate Finance Committee to testify on behalf of SB 397, the Health Care Freedom Act of 2010.
As Matt told the Committee, ‘SB 397 will help contribute to this renewed national discussion over the proper role of government in our lives and, more directly, it may help keep the federal government from continuing to expand its unconstitutional health care agenda. It is not only within the power of the sovereign state of Maryland, but it is its duty to stand between its people and an overreaching federal government.”’
3 quick observations:
The Republican plans, however better, are still UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
If something does pass, the Republicans will not have the guts to eliminate it once it gets in place – in fact, they will add to it.
Regardless, we are heading into a dollar bubble/collapse – this healthcare hooey will only serve to speed up the timing of the catastrophe.
I’m betting the ‘budget purpose’ will turn out as quaquaversally [come again?] elastic as the ‘commerce clause’.
Praying without much hope- God gave mankind common sense but many don’t use it, and it is taboo to politicians to even think about common sense. But I do believe that miracles can happen, maybe enough Democrats will see the light and vote against it. I won’t hold my breath though
Sorry about that but I’ve been waiting a long time to resurrect Quaquaversal.
Just not my day is it.
quaquaversal:
http://www.allwords.com/query.php?SearchType=3&Keyword=Quaquaversal&goquery=Find+it!&Language=ENG
I also thought it was interesting that 1) the right even brought up using “undercover patients” and 2) Obama jumped on it. I think it’s a disgrace that the Republicans even brought up such an idea. I also love how the Democrat party mantra has changed it’s language from using the reconcilliation process (the truth) to calling it a simple up-down majority vote. What a croc! To say I’m dripping with disdain about this whole situation is a gross understatement!
George, after looking up the word quaquaversally I think it’s pretty appropriate. I think the latin root summed it up pretty well, “turned whatsoever”. Now let’s do all we can to make sure to stop the government from taking over even more of the health care in this country!
No matter what happens it will be crucial to kill it. The Republicans will never have the will or the cajones to overturn it if they ever get power. After all, they want to be loved inside the beltway.
One of the few good examples of using my (VA) state tax money would be to challenge any health care hooey in the Supreme Court. For a rare instance, the government would be acting to “secure these rights” as a prominent Virginian wrote down in 1776.
Sadly, the Supreme Court repealed the 10th Amendment in 1942 in Wickard v. Filburn where Roscoe Filburn, feeding grain to his horse, was interfering with interstate commerce. And at least Filburn was a real commercial farmer compared with chemotherapy patient Angel Raich, whose homegrown marijuana was also interfering in interstate commerce in Gonzales v. Raich (2005). The only remaining dissenter on the Court from 2005 is Clarence Thomas so Virginia’s stand is basically political. But, it is good to fight the fight. It will take a lot of persistence to sway the public consensus away from the concept of the federal government taking care of all personal needs to the philosophy of the 10th Amendment.
WARNING – beware of the Republicans! Example – “conservative” Katherine Harris, of Bush-Florida-2000 – sponsored H.R. 1276, the American Dream Downpayment Act of 2003. Being ANTI-OBAMA doesn’t equal being PRO-CONSTITUTION. But an alliance of convenience is an alliance!
[Very informative. Thanks.]