Breaking News ... GOP Repeal of Health-Care Fails

@gladys46 (1205)
United States
February 2, 2011 5:42pm CST
On a vote of 47 to 51 the Senate defeated a GOP effort to repeal President Obama's health care overhaul. While the outcome was expected, not a single Democrat voted to proceed with repeal, underscoring the great hurdle that Republican efforts to revisit the health care law face in the Senate. Read more at Washingtonpost. Was this just a baby step for democrats?
2 people like this
7 responses
@RobtheRock (2433)
• United States
3 Feb 11
While you say, "While the outcome was expected, not a single Democrat voted to proceed with repeal", it can also be said that "not a single (Republican) voted (not) to proceed with repeal." I think it's a giant step for Democrats. It shows that they might change some things about it, but it won't be overhauled.
@gladys46 (1205)
• United States
3 Feb 11
RobtheRock ... millions of your fellow Americans (I'm almost sure) hope you're right.
@sierras236 (2739)
• United States
3 Feb 11
Actually, it sends a clear message to the position of the Senators. Some of those Democrats are going to be extremely vulnerable from this vote. Now, there is an additional platform for challengers to stand on. There is still more fallout to come from this monstrosity. Some of the taxes for it are coming fairly soon. Doctors have already been dropping Medicare patients like flies. Some places won't even accept them anymore. It is the Seniors that hold more political power because they are the ones that actually vote. This is a hollow victory at best.
@gladys46 (1205)
• United States
3 Feb 11
sierras, do you really think democrats would be made weaker/vulnerable from this vote? With republicans attacking s/s with vigor do you really think seniors will be voting republican? Have you talked with any seniors who are members of AARP, I have ... AARP are sending them newletters enmasse to fight with all they have against republicans. I don't know too much about doctors not accepting medicare but, what I do know is that no senior that I know covered by medicare has that problem. Many in my civil groups have no complaints re: doctors not accepting their plans.
1 person likes this
• United States
3 Feb 11
Yeah, actually Bill Nelson of Nebraska is one of those very vulnerable Senators. The special deal he got for his vote hurt him even though it never made it to the final copy. He is up for reelection in two years. There are others who are in predominately Republican districts that are going to be hurt by this vote. Seniors are typically a Republican voting block. The same is true of the Military. It typically slants toward Republicans due to their stance on more money for the government. The AARP donates to the liberal organizations. There is an alternative to the AARP for seniors. But the massive mailings typically turn people off to an organization. http://www.americanseniors.org/ It starts with doctors not accepting new patients and then gradually dropping them. It might have not hit your area yet but give it time. The Doctor fix has not passed in Congress. For many doctors, the compensation of 40 cents on the dollar is simply not worth the trouble. They may keep the same people but they won't necessarily be putting new patients on their list.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
3 Feb 11
"sierras, do you really think democrats would be made weaker/vulnerable from this vote?" It sure made them weaker in November. Did you see how many seats they lost? "AARP are sending them (seniors) newletters enmasse to fight with all they have against republicans." That's because they received an $18 million dollar bribe for their support of the health care bill. Fortunately seniors aren't that stupid and continue to oppose this unconstitutional garbage. http://spectator.org/blog/2009/11/18/aarp-received-18-million-in-st
@laglen (19759)
• United States
3 Feb 11
Gladys - FYI - here is "The rest of the story" [i]The Senate voted Wednesday for the first time to repeal a piece of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, rolling back a new tax reporting requirement that’s been universally panned by business owners. The amendment to repeal the 1099 reporting requirement passed 81-17 with broad bipartisan support. [/i] Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/48726.html#ixzz1CrhljYJu
@laglen (19759)
• United States
3 Feb 11
I am not sure how it is entirely a different story since it addresses the very same you legislation you posted. Also, regarding some of the other comments that this is still a victory for Republicans, maybe this will explain that a little better. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/03/gop-health-law-repeal-defeat-step-victory/
@gladys46 (1205)
• United States
3 Feb 11
Hi laglen ... thanks but, this is an entirely different story ... not the "rest" of my story!! This could have been a "new" discussion for you though. Yes, yes I did hear this news ... this was a just about a bipartisan vote addressing the business community's complaints of the paperwork problems in having to file 1099 forms. This was a good repeal for business sake. There may be many more pieces of the Afforadable Health Care Act that is in need of alteration! President Obama has expressed a willingness to revisit any legitimate concerns. The repeal of this historical Act in its entirely, will be argued out in the high court.
1 person likes this
@gladys46 (1205)
• United States
3 Feb 11
laglen, was this two separate voting sessions? If so, it just may have been two separate issues. Would you say that making a correction on the "piece" of the legislation that dealth with paperwork, 1099 forms has to be a far cry from the vote to REPEAL the entire Act.
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
3 Feb 11
Simply put, republicans accomplished what they set out to do with this repeal vote. They wanted to expose the democrats who continue to support this bill that is both unconstitutional, and unpopular. Now they have the names on record for opposing the repeal and you can bet this will be used in the next round of elections.
• United States
3 Feb 11
Oh yeah...this will be used to heck and back. If Egypt was not headlines news right now this would be a big story and I think people would get as mad as they did when it passed. But be sure the republicans will remind the public next time they go to the polls.
• United States
3 Feb 11
All I am saying they WILL use it as a political weapon come the next election. You know they will. It is a bill that has split the country. Alot of poeple wanted it...but alot didn't. So therefore they can use it as a wedge issue.
@gladys46 (1205)
• United States
3 Feb 11
lilwonders ... republicans will remind the public of what? That they continue to waste good time with loosing arguments? That they continue to work on stuff like re-defining awful molestations? Whatever happened to jobs, jobs, jobs?? I think the public is having great buyer's remorse ... when will republican leaders get to accomplishing what they used as campaign slogans, jobs, jobs, jobs! Oh, okay ... they did use the slogan Health care a job "killing" bill!! Wait, wait ... they changed that to something a little different didn't they?
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
3 Feb 11
"just a baby step for democrats? " A babystep towards total disregard and defiance of the U.S. Constitution.
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
3 Feb 11
....that being said, it will never be realistically or effectively fought at the federal level.
• United States
3 Feb 11
You know why they did it now? Because all of our backs are turned watch Egypt. After the way the public acted when they passed it. They would rather this vote not get as much attention.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
6 Feb 11
Actually, I think this vote was scheduled before all this started happening in Egypt. Annie
@gladys46 (1205)
• United States
3 Feb 11
lilwonders ... the cuts to doctors from medicare had nothing to do with the past democratic congress or this one ... those cuts happen to have been the consequences of a 1997 part of the Balanced Budget Act, in that Act, the then congress said that physicians income, which is price times quantity, cannot go up by more than the increase in our national income. Our current congress was supposed to deal with this proposed cut to doctors in the lame duck session passed. I'm not sure but, Congress had agreed on a bipartisan basis to delay Medicare payment cuts to doctors. I do know that the House approved a bill postponing a 23% cut in doctor's pay that had been scheduled to take effect on Dec.1, 2010 ... the Senate had already passed a short term reprieve. Have you more info on this?
@gladys46 (1205)
• United States
3 Feb 11
Correction = " ... lame duck session 'past'"
@Adoniah (7513)
• United States
3 Feb 11
It is a shame that they wrote such a mish mashed bill to start with. It is also a shame that they had to tag so much junk onto it that had nothing to do with health care at all. It is also a shame that they had to break the constitution by making it mandatory. It is also a shame that they had to break the law further by making everyone pay for it for years before anyone even benefited from it. It is also a shame that they let certain groups of people opt out of paying for benefits yet they can still receive benefits...these are not people that cannot afford to pay. So now there will be litigation for who knows how long while they fight this out in court. So it does not matter what happened in the Senate does it? Both parties have showed that they are liers anyway. All politicians are.