2010-03-18T14:25:14Z opencongress.org tag:opencongress.org,2007:/bill/comments/63409 2010-03-18T14:25:14Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-18:/comment/189193 chadlupkes 25% support right now. Why? Does it go too far, or not far enough? 2010-07-05T00:54:04Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-07-05:/comment/203352 brking last time i read the constitution i remember my favorite parts of article 1 section 8: "congress shall have the power to...provide for the common welfare of the united states,... regulate commerce (that means the health care industry) ...(my favorite vague statement) To make all laws which shall be NECESSARY AND PROPER for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof." I'm no lawyer but I'm very sure due to their vagueness and vastness one of these three clauses cover it. i guess fox news pundits didn't read the constitution either, yet they love stressing patriotism how ironic (or rather manipulative for their political end). sorry didn't meant to pick on fox because CNN and the rest do it too. that is they are hypocrites for profit and political power. 2010-03-18T20:38:29Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-18:/comment/189250 Godizincontrol There is no justification for this bill. It is a scare tactic by the Democrats to limit the checks and balances provided by the Constitution. There is NO way as 2,000 page document can only be debated in 20 hours, have no amendments to it, and attempt to pass Congress. How long will we let our representatives in Washington destroy the freedoms and rights that are protected in this nation? 2010-03-19T07:20:16Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-19:/comment/189309 chadlupkes So, 15 months of debate wasn't enough. Republicans used reconciliation to pass their tax cut package in 2001. Was that a hijacking of America? Or is that a partisan talking point? If 2,000 pages is too complicated, is Grayson's 3.5 page bill better? And I suppose our Supreme Court could declare the bill to be unconstitutional for some reason. They've got the guts now that they are a pure political body. 2010-03-18T15:41:59Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-18:/comment/189214 jebarnhart Not allowing for a complete review, vote and introduction of additional points of view limmits the future benefits to Americans. It took years for our Founding Fathers to finally come up with a government plan that we should cherish more than we do today. This reconciliation bill is another form of political manuevaring, payback, and hijacking of America by corrupt individuals who care more about themselves than the country as a whole. It ruined Rome centuries ago, this style of politics will ruin our democracy too. It needs to stop. I thought government was going to be clear, concise, without earmarks, special treatments would be what the people WANT!!! Keeping Freedom Free!!! 2010-03-19T15:23:27Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-19:/comment/189397 zagrovich Have you read the Constitution? Is the government the answer to all? Simple and common sense solutions that are not intrusive on our liberty is the answer not all encompassing government. 2010-03-19T17:09:43Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-19:/comment/189410 LucasFoxx I almost did what stage people call a "spit take" when I read the words "Public Option." The Public Option is essentially the Exchange. Good stuff in here: medical loss ratio rebates, elimination of annual or lifetime limits, no cost-sharing for preventive care, increased penalties for fraud and abuse, money and more authority for enforcement of consumer protection laws, whistle blower protection, lots of transparency issues are addressed,... Other than communism, socialism, the wrath of God, and the end of the democracy, capitalism, and maybe the Earth itself, what’s not to like? 2010-03-19T17:18:52Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-19:/comment/189411 LucasFoxx That's this crowd. Fortunately, it doesn't reflect the electorate. Don't expect much. Most of this crowd would fall under the "it goes too far" sentiment, because the whole idea of it is "unconstitutional" or "anti-capitalism" or just "un-American." 2010-03-19T19:11:27Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-19:/comment/189419 jester667 Do not vote yes on this reconciliation bill. If you do we (your employers) will remove you from your positions and replace you with individuals who truly represent the people of the United States of America. This is a promise. You are on notice. This is your probationary period and your actions in the coming days will decide your future with this institution. The Management 2010-03-21T12:49:51Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-21:/comment/189609 JenniferK Any one else notice that with this plan(on the comparison page)"4 million fewer people would have employer coverage than under current law" http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/1737-How-Does-the-Reconciliation-HCR-Bill-Compare-on-the-Numbers- 2010-03-21T13:17:56Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-21:/comment/189619 LucasFoxx The word "opinion" in your link told me all I need to know. I'm only interested in the facts on the table. I can form my own opinions. 2010-03-21T13:20:53Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-21:/comment/189620 LucasFoxx You had me going there for a second, because I hadn't actually looked very closely at those provisions. So I looked. And lo and behold! It's not there. Perhaps you can point it out to us what you are talking about? 2010-03-21T11:33:29Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-21:/comment/189597 aero405 Also, as I review the bill's contents I'm baffled to find $255,000,000 of tax money dedicated to colleges based on the skin color of their students. Is this a health reform bill or an affirmative action bill? Funny that you hear nothing about this content when Obama speaks on television. 2010-03-21T13:22:37Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-21:/comment/189621 LucasFoxx You would kind of expect that wouldn't you? Given the other options available? 2010-03-21T15:28:46Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-21:/comment/189650 JenniferK No I would hope that more companies would offer insurance plans considering the posible fine if they don't. This also means you have to subtract the 4 million from the 30 they promised health care for. 26 million is the result which is about the same as the say the 5% of uninsured Americas they say will be left. So basicly this great plan is to insure 5% of the public. Really that much money for 5%? 2010-03-21T16:47:19Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-21:/comment/189657 aero405 You missed the point, which was that there are valid and well-reasoned arguments against the current bill. I suppose it's easier to ignore those and go for the low-hanging fruit in your mockeries though, right? 2010-03-21T18:40:30Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-21:/comment/189678 kipanderson The problem Mr. 405 is that people like me have not actually read the text of the bill, yet here I am. Of WHAT I KNOW, I support it. It does more good than bad. No doubt there is much that could be fixed, but the more important failings of the private health insurance system are addressed for the better. You can no more prove that those opposing the bill have read it than you can prove that I have not. So lets not make such generalizations here, ok? 2010-03-21T16:32:20Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-21:/comment/189653 aero405 Sure: Sec 103 (b). The provision extends race-specific college funding originally established (in HR2669) for another 10 years (to 2019) at $255,000,000 per year, for a total new commitment of $2.55 billion. I'll even link it for you: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h4872/text?version=rh&nid=t0:rh:14079 So now that you've found it, care to take a shot at explaining to us how this improves health care? 2010-03-22T07:54:47Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-22:/comment/189799 LucasFoxx Thanks, I see it now. On its face, it doesn't improve Health Care. But it is hardly unprecedented. "INVESTMENT IN HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES AND OTHER MINORITY-SERVING INSTITUTIONS" Doesn't make it a skin color issue, it's an issue of underserved institutions. I don't have a problem with this. 2010-03-22T12:24:08Z tag:opencongress.org,2010-03-22:/comment/189854 klassylady25 Very well said snappy. And yes, Judge Napolitano, does get it!