House passes doc fix 243-183.
With one Republican alongside, Democrats have voted to stop pretending that we’re going to cut future Medicare payments to doctors. Well that’s commendably honest I suppose. But now that we’re admitting that the money will be spent, when do we state where the money will come from? The Dems’ vote includes no funding mechanism. We’ll worry about that later, apparently.
12 responses so far
1 MI-GOPer // Nov 20, 2009 at 8:50 am
David, they’ve done it before…
http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=144177
Fact Check: President Obama Repeats Falsehoods in Joint Session Speech
Washington, Sep 10 – Last night during his address to a joint session of Congress on the topic of health care, President Obama again repeated many claims that simply aren’t true. But despite the President’s rhetoric, the Democrats’ health care bills will force millions of Americans out of their current health care plans, add to the federal deficit, and increase Americans’ health care costs. Following are some of the discredited claims the President repeated last night:
CLAIM: “…[N]othing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.”
FACT: This marked an important change in the President’s language last night. He used to say, “If you like your health-care plan, you keep your health-care plan.” By now using the word “require,” the President’s admitting that they can’t guarantee Americans will keep their health plan. After both the Associated Press, ABC News and others have thoroughly debunked this claim, it’s not surprising the White House has made this shift. But the point is that no one knows for sure how many employers will drop their coverage altogether if their plan goes into effect. Experts at the Lewin Group estimate the number could be more than 100 million Americans. And $500 billion in Medicare cuts will obviously reduce the quality of care America’s seniors receive.
CLAIM: “The plan will not add to our deficit…I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – either now or in the future. Period.”
FACT: According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the House Democrats’ bill would increase the deficit by $239 billion over 10 years. And a recent study by the Lewin Group found that “[i]n the second 10 years…the proposal would add an estimated $1 trillion to the federal deficit.”
Obama and the Democrats lie again. Who’d have thunk it possible?
2 teabag // Nov 20, 2009 at 9:53 am
Mi-GOP..
Answer me just one question honestly with a yes /no
As a veteran (I assume you are one) Do you take advantage of the government paid for and provided (Via the VA) programs including free health care?
Love Teabag
3 sinz54 // Nov 20, 2009 at 10:15 am
teabag:
VA health care isn’t “free.” Our veterans PAID for that health care by being willing to give their lives in service to their nation. Some have been maimed in combat. That’s payment enough
What have YOU done to deserve taxpayer-supported health care that’s comparable?
4 teabag // Nov 20, 2009 at 10:38 am
Sinz. I am a veteran also.also.
5 teabag // Nov 20, 2009 at 10:39 am
though not in the USA army.
6 LFC // Nov 20, 2009 at 11:10 am
Well that’s commendably honest I suppose.
Oh, the grudging admission. While the Dems are still playing some of the Washington budget games, they are LIGHT YEARS ahead of the Republicans in fiscal honesty and attempting to actually pay for what they pass.
- Afghanistan? CHARGE IT! (Bush and the GOP Congress refused to even put it in the budget.)
- Iraq? CHARGE IT! (Bush and the GOP Congress refused to even put it in the budget.)
- Tax cuts? CHARGE ‘EM! (Hey, they pay for themselves, right?)
- Medicare Part D? CHARGE IT! (Head Medicare actuary tells you the cost will be higher than you’re saying? CHARGE HIM!)
Now if the GOP runs on a plank of 100% honest accounting, I’ll listen. If they say they’d pull Social Security surpluses out of the general budget figures to show the true amount of the deficit, I’m there. But judging from their recent borrow and spend ways, I won’t hold my breath.
7 JohnMcC // Nov 20, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Don’t you see, my friend Mr LFC, that all those things that the previous administration did—’special’ bills to pay for tw0 wars, Medicare part D’s unfunded subsidy of PHarma and such—those were Bill Clinton’s fault. He left this horrible surplus. It was money that belonged to Real Americans. So the Repubs were only giving it back. And giving more back. And more. Until there was nothing left and the Banks were failing. Damn that Bill Clinton!!
8 Independent // Nov 20, 2009 at 1:41 pm
ahhh, we now have a new character and new troll… it’s John McC
not very original, that.
i guess for trolls living under a bridge, this is hard work and heavy intellectual lifting for them.
sad, sad, sad trolls.
9 ottovbvs // Nov 20, 2009 at 5:23 pm
MI-GOPer // Nov 20, 2009 at 8:50 am
Independent // Nov 20, 2009 at 1:41 pm
sinz54 // Nov 20, 2009 at 10:15 am
……..David and the Kool Aiders listed above might like to read this piece by Bruce Bartlett in the current edition of Forbes where he explains how GWB with the prescription drug benefit added about 15.5 trillion in present value terms to the national debt…..AND NONE OF IT WAS FUNDED……unlike the healthcare bill which at least has some offsets……Bartlett calls these jokers for what they are…….hypocrites!
http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/19/republican-budget-hypocrisy-health-care-opinions-columnists-bruce-bartlett.html
10 cpanza // Nov 20, 2009 at 10:11 pm
It’s also printed here at Bartlett’s blog, FWIW:
http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/bruce-bartlett/
11 ottovbvs // Nov 21, 2009 at 9:39 am
10 cpanza // Nov 20, 2009 at 10:11 pm
…….a deafening silence ensues from the usual “hypocrisy” suspects
12 cpanza // Nov 21, 2009 at 11:12 am
Otto:
Not surprising, though, is it? The whole point is (a) to make sure you have a steady diet of outrage and (b) to make sure that the outrage expressed makes you feel better about yourself. Bartlett’s columns can often offer a lot for the (a) column but nothing to offer in the (b) column, as the outrage (in this case) would have to be directed at oneself.
There isn’t a big market for that.
You must log in to post a comment.