Rep Conyers on reading Bills
 

http://ifawebnews.com/2009/07/27/con...e-reform-bill/

Hard to believe! :cus:

The only unfortunate fact here is that Rep. Conyers is speaking honestly. The vast majority will either have some staff member read it and/or just 'go along to get along.' They simply will not be honest about it.

My question is....

Is this a new thing...not reading aloud the bills before Congress or has this always been the case?

And if it has not been the case why is everyone so upset about it now?

I can tell you why I am upset it. Because I have read it. At least the current available version and don't like these things. And none of you should.

• Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
• Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
• Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
• Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
• Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
• Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
• Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
• Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
• Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
• Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (I.e., total government control of private plans)
• Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
• Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
• Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
• Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
• Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
• Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
• Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.
• Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
• Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
• Page 167: Any individual who doesn’t' have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
• Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
• Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
• Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it really says that.
• Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected."
• Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
• Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc.
• Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.
• Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
• Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
• Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.
• Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
• Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!
• Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
• Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
• Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.
• Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
• Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals.
• Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).
• Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
• Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.
• Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
• Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
• Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
• Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.
• Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.
• Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.
• Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
• Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.

Forget it I answered the question myself....

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...&type=politics

It is a new Republican tactic.....

Democrats complained for 8 years and Obama promised a change.....they all lied.

There's an audio clip of BO about five years ago complaining about bills not being read and congress not being given enough time to read the bills before they vote. Typical double standard. It's ok not to read as long as it's his bills.

Are we really discussing whether it's ok or not ok for our elected officials to read things before they sign? WOW.

Did I miss a plank in the Obama platform? .....so once again you are a hypocrite.

No reading when the Repubs were in = OK
No reading when the Dems are in = Not OK

Its so hard not to laugh....LOL

Actually that is NOT it.....requiring the bills to be read aloud before the vote. The energy bill took 9 hours....what's the point.

Sure I think they should read the bills before they vote.:cus:

Who is a hipocrate? Obama and the democrats complained and said if you elect them they would not do it. They got elected and it was business as usual. Obama Lied.

You're right - passing bills wo reading them is a new tactic. However, if you had taken the time to read your citation, you would have seen it is a Democrat tactic and not a Republican one. The Democrats were in the majority.

To quote from you citation:

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., a veteran of energy battles in the Senate, pointed out that when the Clean Air Act was debated in 1990, senators spent five weeks scrutinizing it and 162 amendments were considered.

"Now can you imagine this bill is far more important in terms of ramifications to the American economy," Domenici said. "It is probably the biggest, most complicated bill we've had, certainly in the 36 years that I've been a senator."

Would you avoid hiring a lawyer who would not read the case against you?

Would you change physicians if you found out your physician never read your family history during diagnosis and treatment?

Would you stay away from a dentist who would not view your xrays before drilling?

Would you change stockbrokers if your's never researched the companies whose stock s/he recommended for acquisition?

In all of the above, of course you would.

So, why would anyone extend the contract of an agent who spent your money on projects when s/he never read the information documents on the projects? That's what you do when you re-elect a congressperson too lazy to read, research and comprehend anyh bill before voting on it. Your congressperson is your agent - is that the service you expect and condone?

Oh, wait. The congressperson does not have to read anything because the party leadership has already read it and told him/her how to vote. Hmmm, does that make the congressperson the agent of the party or the district/voters? Isn't that obvious?

Conyers: Just another jackass to get rid of in '10.

I really don't believe that reading bills aloud before the House and Senate was a part of Obama's campaign promises. Do you have something from his campaign website to prove your point?

Something about transparency in government I think it was. :a20:

Total BS....when confronted with the facts you throw up a smoke screen.

ENOUGH!

If you listen to the audio,Conyers says reading the bill,not reading it aloud in the house.
Hope this clears it up. :beer3:

barfRemember.... laughter is good...

Perhaps you missed that they cut off is his in mid sentence but I did not.

Unless of course you are ramming through trillions of stealth spending or a health care bill in three weeks that no one has read.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU0m6Rxm9vU[/ame]

You seem to like the little barf and cus guys....

I get a lot of laughs from this thread.

I find it rather amazing the number of keystrokes being
 

wasted with the old he did, she did, no they did, they didn't, he didn't, she didn't.....that is the real BS.

How about keeping the politics out of it and sdreess the issue on the basis of whether it is right or wrong.

What do you sign without reading? Ahhhh nuts....bad question.... I forgot that is what one does when it involves one's own assets, responsibility and accountability. Since politicians have none of those issues they can elect to not read or cater to the special interest groups.

The question is do you think your representatives should read and understand what this history making legislation could present to we the people???
It is a party neutral question....more akin to the stand and be counted culture of the past.....some here must be as old as I am to remember that virtue....eh?

It is wrong to pass ANY legislation without reading it.....regardless who in the :cus::cus: did or did not in the past.

btk

Clearly, and once more I will say it, the people in Congress should be reading the bills before signing them. My issue is with forcing the bills to be read out loud as a delaying tactic.

So what!

And if we're talking about adding thousands more federal workers and contractors, and who knows how many new computer systems to data-manage this info-explosion in a HIPPA environment, making sure that everyone, especially those who have already proven that Hooked On Phonics should be on every congressperson's desk, at least has heard the content seems reasonable.

Reading and understanding what one has read are two different issues. I would hope that both occur prior to a vote, or the vote is a sham.

The Congress is not supposed to be a White House rubber stamp, and when it is - regardless of party - we all lose.

It took 9 hours to read the climate bill with no one around....waste of time.

I work in the industry HIPPA drives me nuts...I have to review interface files when they don't work but they contain patient information. Hospital won't allow us to have modem access but expect support. Its nuts.

colagal, Once again you dodge the issue. First you claimed that Republicans were the ones pushing bills through without having Congress or the people have the opportunity to read them. When, using your own citation, I showed conclusively that this is a Democrat tactic, you chose not to answer -very Obama like I should say. Avoid confronting the truth at all cost.

Now you say that actually reading a bill was a waste of time. I admit, it certainly was a waste of time if you think the totally destructive 'stimulus' bill was a good thing or believe that we should all be good little sheepople and follow Obama into a totally unexamined Healthcare Policy.

Why do you continue to support a regime that has taken over the automobile industry, largely nationalized most of the banking system and now wants to take over the entire Healthcare system? I'm sorry, but I support the ideas in the Constitution of a limited Federal government with strong state and local governments responsible to the people they represent. When you have a chance, please show me in the Constitution where Healthcare is a Federal/National government responsibility or area of concern.

Reading aloud a bill to no one is a waste of time. And you believe the Repubs in the last administration read aloud or read the bills at all. Sure I believe that.

On at least one point you are clearly confusing the Obama administration with the Bush administration. TARP was issued by Paulson....under Bush.

I support reforming the healthcare system because it needs it. I have looked all over for the bill itself so I could read it but alas...no luck.

And your choice of the word regime is telling.

So are you a birther too?

Did you read the bill?
 

Does it matter what happened in the last administration, or the one before it, or before it ad infinitum? Yes, but only to the extent of insuring what was done wrong isn't repeated. Two wrongs definitely don't make a right.

And since the delivery of health care crosses state lines, an argument can be made that the "Commerce Clause" of the Constitution can apply to allow federal intervention in health care. With the FDA involved, HIPPA land other related activities, it's not a hard argument.

However, having the authority and exercising it badly and expensively as a national experiment with no empirical data prior to full implementation is foolhardy.

The list is getting longer
 

How did all these idiots get in office and why are they still there ? Lets get rid of all of them.:agree::agree::agree:

It never ceases to amaze me....while it is true "two wrongs don't make a right" it is totally hypocritical, and I say this only as a general comment, to rail against a practice which we all know has been going on for years...as if it just started.

Healthcare has to be fixed.....

Independents have been complaining for quite a while how the two parties first act for their own good, and then worry about the nation as an afterthought.

If the Democrats want to now show themselves as "more enlightened" than the Republicans, then the Dems should act "more enlightened" and do what's right, instead of doing what's convenient for the party.

Cologal: I am a Conservative (notice I didn't say Republican). I'm wondering why you always bring everything to party loyalty (blindly I might add). The discussion should be what is good for Americans as a whole, not black, white, hispanic, muslim, whatever. As long as you are an American citizen, you should be looking at these issues for yourself as well as collectively.

When I point out a politician that is gone off the reservation, I refer to him as an idiot or a jackass. Wouldn't it sound goofy to call the politician an elephant ! So, I refer to politicians as a whole entity and one by one.

When someone just throws facts and data away for the sake of sticking with a mistaken vote or mistaken ideology, then that person is not taken seriously.

:beer3: I agree with that assessment. I am in the same boat...a conservative. I would gladly vote democrat if their party did a 180 degree. I have bashed Bush in the past as I feel he wasn't a real conservative. Sometimes (in the last 20 years) you have to vote for the less of 2 evils.

I wholeheartly agree with your comments. Put the party aside and debate the issue as what is best for the country and not the party.

Let me address your issues in order. As I have repeatedly pointed out using your own reference, and you continue to deny, jamming a bill through in the middle of the night is a Democrat not a Republican tactic. The real question for you is 'why do you continue to deny the truth'?

I have not confused the actions of the Bush and Obama administrations. In this point you appear to be confusing two different bills. TARP was a program passed to buttress the financial system. Upon coming into office, Obama immediately diverted funds to other purposes. The Stimulus bill is an entirely different item jammed through in the middle of the night, committing much more money than TARP ever had.

I believe we need to do something about healthcare, but it should be done slowly, using pilot programs such as suggested by Steve Z. It should not include coverage for people here illegally. I have not read the bill in total, but what I have read frightens me. It is full government control and rationing of healthcare. This link will take you to the GPO and HR 3200.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...3200ih.txt.pdf

The use of the word ‘regime’ is deliberate. We have an administration with well over 30 czars, primarily extreme left wing representatives, who are accountable to no one except the president. This is not the government spelled out is our constitution.

As to your ‘birther’ question – The House of Representatives unanimously passed a resolution Monday, July 27th honoring Hawaii as the birthplace of Barack Obama, aka Barry Soetoro. Although I have my questions, I believe this puts the issue to bed.

Colagal,

Where is the Barry Soetoro booster when actually asked to answer questions wo hiding behind Democrat rhetoric?

Perhaps we are looking at this forum through different lenses. I could point out a larger number of post bashing Obama, Pelosi, Barney Frank...etc.

I vote for both Democrats and Republicans...and did so this last election cycle. My point in this thread has been that a new Republican drum beat, or talking point if you like..is that the bills are not being read aloud. So much so that the Democrats hired a speed reader to start reading a bill aloud recently.

To me this is hypocritical regardless of the party.

OMG you are a birther..... can't stop laughing.

Actually the term birther is a take-off on the crazy left's "truther" The truthers believe that President Bush planned 9/11.