Key liberal congressman flips to 'yes' on health care vote

Status
Not open for further replies.

jillio

New Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
60,077
Reaction score
22
Washington (CNN) -- Health care reform advocates inched closer to victory Wednesday as a high-profile liberal Democrat switched his position and announced his intention to vote for a sweeping $875 billion plan under consideration in the House of Representatives.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, said he believes "health care is a civil right." He had previously characterized the bill, which cleared the Senate in December, as little more than a boondoggle for private insurers.

Kucinich was publicly lobbied for his vote by President Barack Obama during the president's visit this week to Kucinich's congressional district in Ohio. He told reporters he's had four meetings with Obama to discuss the bill.

"The president's visit to my district ... underscored the urgency of this vote," Kucinich said. "I have doubts about the bill ... [but] I've decided to cast a vote in favor of the legislation."

He said he ultimately had "to make a decision on the bill as it is, not on the bill as I'd like to see it." Kucinich is a backer of a single-payer health care system under which the government would fund all costs billed by doctors and hospitals.

Kucinich's decision to change his vote is "a good sign," Obama told reporters in the Oval Office. "I told him thank you."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said she thought Kucinich's switch would make a difference with a large number of liberal activists.

"He's been a supporter of health care for all Americans for a long time," she said. "He has a constituency, and many of those people still don't understand why there isn't a public [option]."

Pelosi has repeatedly expressed confidence that she will have enough support to pass the bill when it comes to the floor for a final vote.



Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 House Democrat, indicated Wednesday the vote could come at some point this weekend. He said the leadership is still waiting for final cost estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office on a package of changes to the measure.



Health care power broker Asked if the release of the CBO numbers was imminent, Pelosi said, "I would have said ... half an hour ago, hopefully any minute. I think it's going to take a little more time."

She said she had no explanation for the delay.

"I don't know the calculation," she said. "I don't know how they do it. Whatever it is, they're the gospel and we have to live by it."

Later, Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami said that the CBO estimates would not be released Wednesday night. Since the Democrats have said the bill will be available for reading for 72 hours before a vote, the vote can take place no sooner than Sunday, provided the CBO numbers are posted Thursday.

Pelosi needs 216 votes from her 253-member caucus to pass the Senate bill. No Republicans are expected to back it.

A number of House Democrats have refused to state their voting intentions publicly. Twenty-seven House Democrats, however, have indicated they will join Republicans in opposing the Senate plan. That puts opponents of reform 11 votes shy of the 216 needed to prevent Obama from scoring a major victory on his top domestic priority.

Meanwhile, GOP leaders continued to pound away at the legislation on Wednesday, slamming House Democratic leaders for considering the use of a controversial legislative maneuver to pass the Senate bill.

Pelosi may try to help House Democrats unhappy with the Senate bill by allowing them to avoid a direct vote on the measure. She is considering pushing for a vote on a rule that would simply "deem" the Senate bill to be passed.

The House then would proceed to a separate vote on the more popular package of changes to the Senate plan.

"I've never seen anything like the plan that House Democrats hatched this week to jam their health care bill through Congress," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said Wednesday.

"Historians will remember this as a new low in this debate, the week that America was introduced to the 'scheme and deem' approach to legislating. They'll remember this as the week that Congress tried to pull the wool over the eyes of the public in order to get around their will."

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Tuesday that Republicans will try to block the procedure. They will try to force a vote on a resolution requiring the Senate health care bill to be brought to an up-or-down vote.

Boehner has called the maneuver -- also known as a "self-executing rule" -- the "ultimate in Washington power grabs."

Historians will ... remember this as the week that Congress tried to pull the wool over the eyes of the public in order to get around their will.

House Republicans sent a letter to the Democratic head of the House Rules Committee on Wednesday asking her to move an upcoming hearing on the health care bill to a larger room to account for overwhelming public interest in the issue.

The committee is responsible for deciding whether the full House will have a chance to pass the Senate bill using the self-executing rule.

"While C-SPAN may decide to cover the hearing, that does not satisfy the need for the maximum amount of transparency and openness needed to give the American people faith in this process," the letter said.

"By moving the hearing to a larger room, we can ensure more Americans will have the opportunity to participate in our proceedings and not be turned away at the door."

Where does health care reform stand?

If enacted, the Democratic reform proposal would constitute the biggest expansion of federal health care guarantees since the enactment of Medicare and Medicaid more than four decades ago. The plan is expected to extend insurance coverage to more than 30 million Americans.

The Senate bill also would reduce federal deficits by about $118 billion over 10 years, according to CBO estimates.

Top Republicans contend the plan amounts to an ill-conceived government takeover of the country's health care system. They have said it would do little to slow spiraling medical costs. They also argue it would lead to higher premiums and taxes for middle-class families while resulting in deep Medicare cuts.

Key liberal congressman flips to 'yes' on health care vote - CNN.com
 
Can public option be added to this bill later on?
 
Can public option be added to this bill later on?

Tweeks are allowed afterward. Public Option would still require a vote to be added.

The vote talleys I have been watching were already counting DK as a yes. Even Lynn Woolsey said tonight on Countdown that she had been expecting it. They are still about 4 votes short. I really really hope they get those 4 votes.
 
Yes, TXgolfer. And then watch the Democrats lose their seats in the 2010 election. And then begin the repeal process. Of course, there are lawsuits sitting by ready to go if this gets passed, too, on the ground it was passed unconstitutionally.
 
Nothing unconsitutional about it. Just more whining and attempts to deflect.

It is getting closer and closer.
 
Nothing unconsitutional about it. Just more whining and attempts to deflect.

It is getting closer and closer.

Yup, that's right.

kokonut, you are pure selfish and don't care about anyone who don't have insurance, even not qualify for Medicaid/Medicare.

I'm not worried about midterm election in Nov so health reform bill will be very hard to repeal after it has passed.
 
Nothing unconsitutional about it. Just more whining and attempts to deflect.

It is getting closer and closer.

Mandatory health insurance may be unconstitutional.....If they go Slaughter that may be as well....Have to see what the SC says I guess.
 
Mandatory health insurance may be unconstitutional.....If they go Slaughter that may be as well....Have to see what the SC says I guess.

Not any more unconstitutional than mandatory auto insurance or mandatory malpractice insurance.:dunno2: In all cases, the rest of society pays for the uninsured, whether it is an uninsured driver, or someone who receives catastrophic medical care, leaves a $200,000 bill sitting there, and in effect, causes medical costs to rise to cover the loss the hospital experiences in these cases.
 
Not any more unconstitutional than mandatory auto insurance or mandatory malpractice insurance.:dunno2: In all cases, the rest of society pays for the uninsured, whether it is an uninsured driver, or someone who receives catastrophic medical care, leaves a $200,000 bill sitting there, and in effect, causes medical costs to rise to cover the loss the hospital experiences in these cases.

Ah but there is a difference. Auto insurance is required by the state not Fed.

Driving is considered a priviledge not a right and joining the medical field is a choice.

Mandatory health insurance may be the right thing to do but if found unconstitutional it would take an amendment to make it happen.
 
Mandatory health insurance may be unconstitutional.....If they go Slaughter that may be as well....Have to see what the SC says I guess.


Exactly. it's the "deemed to have pass" nonsense that's totally unconstitutional. In other words, pretend that a bill is passed without even voting on it. It is constitionally required that bills must be voted on in both the Representative and Senate chambers before a president can sign it and become law.

But now, I’ve lost my passion for continuing the debate. I’ve lost my motivation to identify the bill’s flaws and failures. I’ve even lost my anger at the arrogance of Washington politicians who think they know best how to manage my medical care and rearrange my personal finances.

Why? Because it’s becoming clear to me that I and other critics of ObamaCare have already won the intellectual battle. We’ve already succeeded in informing the public about the particulars of the bill, and the public now strongly opposes ObamaCare. The more President Obama shouts into his microphone, the more the public comes to oppose his plan. There is no conceivable way that the president or the leaders of Congress can legally enact their legislative monstrosity.

Instead, they are going to cheat.

They are going to employ some kind of legislative trickery to pretend to pass a bill that, they now realize, will never become law through constitutional means. They may use the now-infamous Slaughter Rule, which would allow House members to claim to have voted to amend the objectionable Senate bill without actually having passed it through the House. Or they’ll come up with an even-zanier scheme, including a subsequent reconciliation process in the Senate designed to overcome the very filibuster they’ve used to block conservative bills and nominees in the past.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m not planning to recognize such a result as legally binding. I’m not going to pretend to obey any dictates from federal health-care bureaucrats that have never been authorized by a constitutional vote of both houses of Congress. I will not submit to any extra-constitutional order to dismantle the consumer-driven health plan I have set up for my employees.

I will not comply. If the government tries to make me comply, I’ll sue. And I’ll win.
I Will Not Comply

Do you know who the desperate ones are? The many standing Democrats who are trying to pass this bill without voting on it. You know who else is also desperate? Those who think this method is constitutionally and legally binding.
 
Ah but there is a difference. Auto insurance is required by the state not Fed.

Driving is considered a priviledge not a right and joining the medical field is a choice.

Mandatory health insurance may be the right thing to do but if found unconstitutional it would take an amendment to make it happen.

And all along they've been screaming about choices but when it comes to this mandatory health insurance purchase they say that consumers do not deserve to have choices. Pretty ironic this picture is turning out to be.

Man, Obama is desperate to have some kind of legacy. If anything, it's to become the first socialist president.
 
Ah but there is a difference. Auto insurance is required by the state not Fed.

Driving is considered a priviledge not a right and joining the medical field is a choice.

Mandatory health insurance may be the right thing to do but if found unconstitutional it would take an amendment to make it happen.

Well, Uninsured patients has cost our hospital and doctor, that what I learned from my mother because she is nurse and she believe that mandatory insurance is necessary because it would prevent government and hospital from losing the money when uninsured patients couldn't afford to pay medical bills so hospital would lose the money as patient file for bankruptcy over medical bill as hospital would lose the money after bankruptcy has approved.

I would want to avoid illegal immigrants to across to medical care in US, for example, if illegal immigrant is from Mexico so they need go back to Mexico to receive a treatment.

Under mandatory insurance coverage, there is exemption from getting insurance if you couldn't afford or income is too low but still not qualify for Medicaid or Medicare.

I think that mandatory insurance coverage is unnecessary without public options, IMO.
 
You go to jail if you don't purchase mandatory health insurance.

Nice choice there.
 
You go to jail if you don't purchase mandatory health insurance.

Nice choice there.

Not really, you would be fined for no insurance.

If you have insurance so don't worry about it.
 
Not really, you would be fined for no insurance.

If you have insurance so don't worry about it.

I have a savings acct that I have paid into for 22 years for health care. Never made a withdrawl. I put the amount equal to my premiums and deductable would be into that account. Why should I be required by law to purchase insurance now? That's been my point all along. This plan is not fair to everyone. Some of us chose not to be insured and were responsible about it.
 
I have a savings acct that I have paid into for 22 years for health care. Never made a withdrawl. I put the amount equal to my premiums and deductable would be into that account. Why should I be required by law to purchase insurance now? That's been my point all along. This plan is not fair to everyone. Some of us chose not to be insured and were responsible about it.

Are you sure? You would never know if you lose a lot of money or have serious health problem that cost more than your savings so you could left as no money left to pay medical expenses in full.

I had seen many uninsured patients are irresponsible or couldn't afford to get insurance so hospital could lose the money or private hospital would have close the ER to prevent any uninsured patients goes in.

There's around 50 million Americans don't have insurance so we need help them to covered without any fear about hospital would lose the money and we could get less doctors in near future.
 
Don't buy auto insurance if you have a car, you can certainly face jail time.
 
Don't buy auto insurance if you have a car, you can certainly face jail time.

Yup, or will suspend your driver license, depends on states.

If you are uninsured and you hit someone's car so it would be your liability responsible and someone would have sue you.

For reject to have health insurance so you would face fine but for jail, I doubtfully but probably if you refuse to pay fine or have find way to get exempt from fine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top