The Black Vault Message Forums

Discover the Truth!        

General Discussion Topics

W.H.: Obama will veto healthcare repeal

The Black Vault Message Forums has a considerable number of niche forums to place your post. If you can not find a home for it, and the topic doesn't fit anywhere else, then post it here.

Postby blackvault » Wed Jul 11, 2012 11:36 am

As the GOP-controlled U.S. House of Representatives prepared to vote on repeal of the Affordable Care Act, the White House said a repeal bill would be vetoed.

As with previous votes, action by the House — scheduled for Thursday — to repeal President Barack Obama‘s signature healthcare policy likely will go nowhere because the Democratic Senate won’t consider it. In a statement Monday, the White House Office of Management and Budget said Obama would veto a repeal bill “because it would cost millions of hard-working middle class families the security of affordable health coverage and care they deserve. It would increase the deficit and detract from the work the Congress needs to do to focus on the economy and create jobs.”

In a statement, the OMB said repealing the Affordable Care Act would mean “marketplaces where Americans could compare private insurance plans and get tax credits to purchase them would not open.”

“Tax credits for small business owners who cover their employees would be eliminated,” the statement said. “States would lose substantial Federal assistance under Medicaid to provide coverage for the neediest Americans.”

Repeal would mean insured Americans “would lose the benefits and protections they receive under the healthcare law,” the OMB said.

It would take a GOP trifecta in the November elections — winning the White House and control of the Senate and retaining its majority in the House — to overturn the Affordable Care Act or at least defund portions of it, CBS News reported Monday.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last month the individual mandate, the heart of the healthcare law, is constitutional because it is a tax.

http://bighealthreport.com/3929/w-h-oba ... re-repeal/
-----
John Greenewald, Jr.
The Black Vault Website Owner / Operator
http://www.theblackvault.com
User avatar
blackvault
 
Posts: 1776
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 4:04 pm
Location: North Hollywood, Ca.

Postby greeney2 » Wed Jul 11, 2012 12:20 pm

If Obama is reelected, its a done deal, and after its implemented and a working system, nobody will repeal it. If Romney is elected he vows to shut it down his first day in office, which would be before anyone has been affected by it, becasue it will not be implemented yet. Presidents have wiped out entire departments when they took office, Reagan eliminated the Department of Engery, that I think Carter implemented.

Its pretty simple, election day is the final nail to drive into this one way or the other.
greeney2
 
Posts: 9687
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby frrostedman » Wed Jul 11, 2012 10:31 pm

And likewise, Obama's efforts to raise taxes will die an immediate death in the House of Represntatives.

This has been going since somewhere around when Reagan handed the reigns over to Clinton... it's a tit-for-tat pony show. Democrats in both houses have done everything in their power to stop any Republican initiative. Republicans, likewise, are doing the same. Permanent gridlock. It's never going to stop. I really don't see much hope for this country's future, unless Republicans regain control of both houses and the Presidency. We've seen what happens when Liberals get full control. And it's going to take years and years of full Republican control to fix the mess they've created in such short time.

All we gotta do is look across the pond. Spain is collapsing due to out of control government spending (and their sales tax was just increased to 21% !! ). Greece is collapsing for the same reason. Other European countries are in line right behind them. We see it coming to the US but we can stop it if we act NOW. Meanwhile we have a lying dumbass of a President who is putting in place all the worst ideas from those collapsing countries, and trying to rig it where it's irreversible. If he gets 4 more years, we're going down in flames. Obama is pulling out all the stops, and lying to the American people on a constant basis to try and eek out a victory in the upcoming election. The sad thing is, the American people are so ignorant and self-absorbed, enough of us might just vote him back in.

Did you see "Waters' World" the other night? (producer of O'Reilly show) He went around interviewing young liberals, asking them very, very basic questions about the Declaration of Independence and such. Their ignorance was astounding... breathtaking... sickening. One of them said they believed the Declaration of Independence was signed about 30 years ago. And their Obama votes will counter the votes of folks like you and me. This country needs a major awakening.
Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe-a spirit vastly superior to that of man. - Albert Einstein
User avatar
frrostedman
 
Posts: 3783
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 7:01 pm

Postby Halfabo » Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:14 pm

Obama will veto healthcare repeal


The act of a true dictator.
Halfabo
 
Posts: 648
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby SmokinJoe » Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:24 pm

The country is split right down the middle on this. Almost every poll and survey puts it at either 51/49, 50/50 or 52/48. One poll shows the slight not for Obama care, while the next one leans toward repealing it.

As long as this country continues to think us/them, dem/repub, good/bad, etc...we will stay divided. Which is the goal, imo.

I remember the good ole days when you had more than just two candidates hashing it out on national tv, ie. Ross Perot, G. Bush, Clinton and another guy (can't remember his name, but he was an independant for the 'green' causes before becoming 'green' was adopted by the dems.

Now, you see 2 parties debate on tv...dems/repubs. I knew when that first started it was just going to split the country right down the middle.

I don't see much difference between the candidates. Big companies have bought and paid for both parties. And since China holds the note for most of the USA now, either side will have to cater to China's way of thinking for its citizens (think nationally mandated healthcare as just one example of the changes coming):shock:
Dawkins thinks belief in God is an excuse to evade thinking in the scientific world. Sadly, he is ignorant to the list of christian scientists who have contributed & founded many of the sciences he himself believes in. How ironic.
User avatar
SmokinJoe
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: OHIO

Postby rath » Fri Jul 13, 2012 6:03 pm

I don't know why you Americans keep calling it Obama-care???

Fact is this is Hillary Clinton's deal.

Hillary Clinton made an official visit to Australia in the 1990's & 2000's to study Australia's long running MEDICARE system ( universal healthcare ) & work on its application into the USA.

Wikipedia wrote:n January 1993, Bill Clinton appointed Hillary Clinton to head the Task Force on National Health Care Reform, hoping to replicate the success she had in leading the effort for Arkansas education reform.[131] She privately urged that passage of health care reform be given higher priority than the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)



Wikipedia wrote:The recommendation of the task force became known as the Clinton health care plan, a comprehensive proposal that would require employers to provide health coverage to their employees through individual health maintenance organizations. Its opponents quickly derided the plan as "Hillarycare"


Wikipedia wrote:The plan did not receive enough support for a floor vote in either the House or the Senate, although Democrats controlled both chambers, and the proposal was abandoned in September 1994.[134] Clinton later acknowledged in her book, Living History, that her political inexperience partly contributed to the defeat, but mentioned that many other factors were also responsible. The First Lady's approval ratings, which had generally been in the high-50s percent range during her first year, fell to 44 percent in April 1994 and 35 percent by September 1994.[136] Republicans made the Clinton health care plan a major campaign issue of the 1994 midterm elections,[137] which saw a net Republican gain of fifty-three seats in the House election and seven in the Senate election, winning control of both; many analysts and pollsters found the plan to be a major factor in the Democrats' defeat, especially among independent voters.[138] The White House subsequently sought to downplay Hillary Clinton's role in shaping policy.[139] Opponents of universal health care would continue to use "Hillarycare" as a pejorative label for similar plans by others.[140]


Hillary Clinton & president bill Clinton failed to get Medicare ( universal health care ) through the US government,
But a watered down version called Medicaid did pass.

Hillary Clinton Runs for president in 2008 based on healthcare reform & dropped out to join the Obama campaign.

Can you say DEAL / list of demands.

Obama wins presidential election & Then along came Obama-care. ............. Hmmm


Obama care, ( Hillary-care ) is just the rest of Hillary Clinton's original Universal healthcare plan that failed to pass the US Senate all those years ago.
Image
rath
 
Posts: 4344
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby SmokinJoe » Fri Jul 13, 2012 6:13 pm

It's called Obama care because his administration worked on it, amended it, and got it passed. Yes, the concept was nurtured and pursued during the Clinton admin, but the idea has been around even longer than that.

Prior admin's like the Clinton's have reviewed a few countries who have universal healthcare, not just Australia. Germany has the oldest national healthcare. And during Clinton's admin, they looked at Canada's national healthcare system as well.

Switzerland has heavily regulated private insurance in which the regulations keep the private companies from making profits off of the insurance. However, they are allowed to offer supplemental insurance, which they can and do make a profit from.

Australia is simply one of about 31 or 32 developed countries with national healthcare.
Dawkins thinks belief in God is an excuse to evade thinking in the scientific world. Sadly, he is ignorant to the list of christian scientists who have contributed & founded many of the sciences he himself believes in. How ironic.
User avatar
SmokinJoe
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: OHIO

Postby rath » Fri Jul 13, 2012 6:43 pm

SmokinJoe wrote:It's called Obama care because his administration worked on it, amended it, and got it passed. Yes, the concept was nurtured and pursued during the Clinton admin, but the idea has been around even longer than that.

Prior admin's like the Clinton's have reviewed a few countries who have universal healthcare, not just Australia. Germany has the oldest national healthcare. And during Clinton's admin, they looked at Canada's national healthcare system as well.

Switzerland has heavily regulated private insurance in which the regulations keep the private companies from making profits off of the insurance. However, they are allowed to offer supplemental insurance, which they can and do make a profit from.

Australia is simply one of about 31 or 32 developed countries with national healthcare.


Yhe i know all that, im just not seeing any evidence that you all did.

all i see is everybody blaming Obama.

When like you said this has been an issue for yonks.

remember when Michal more made the movie sicko & pointed out Cuba has better health care than the USA.


Watch on youtube.com
Image
rath
 
Posts: 4344
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby SmokinJoe » Fri Jul 13, 2012 10:15 pm

rath wrote:
SmokinJoe wrote:It's called Obama care because his administration worked on it, amended it, and got it passed. Yes, the concept was nurtured and pursued during the Clinton admin, but the idea has been around even longer than that.

Prior admin's like the Clinton's have reviewed a few countries who have universal healthcare, not just Australia. Germany has the oldest national healthcare. And during Clinton's admin, they looked at Canada's national healthcare system as well.

Switzerland has heavily regulated private insurance in which the regulations keep the private companies from making profits off of the insurance. However, they are allowed to offer supplemental insurance, which they can and do make a profit from.

Australia is simply one of about 31 or 32 developed countries with national healthcare.


Yhe i know all that, im just not seeing any evidence that you all did.

all i see is everybody blaming Obama.

When like you said this has been an issue for yonks.

remember when Michal more made the movie sicko & pointed out Cuba has better health care than the USA.


Watch on youtube.com


HUH? ya lost me. You said that you know all that, but then you go on to say that you're not seeing any evidence that we know that. Yet, I just posted info on it, and you quoted it saying you know that as well as I do.

I don't blame Obama. He's just one card in the deck. We have been headed down this path for quite some time. It's called "Obama Care" because during his administration, the idea of national healthcare is now a law!

And, no, I haven't seen all of MM's movie, Sicko. I have seen part of it. But, not enough that I could comment one way or the other on it.
Dawkins thinks belief in God is an excuse to evade thinking in the scientific world. Sadly, he is ignorant to the list of christian scientists who have contributed & founded many of the sciences he himself believes in. How ironic.
User avatar
SmokinJoe
 
Posts: 360
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: OHIO

Postby rath » Fri Jul 13, 2012 10:58 pm

SmokinJoe wrote:
rath wrote:
SmokinJoe wrote:It's called Obama care because his administration worked on it, amended it, and got it passed. Yes, the concept was nurtured and pursued during the Clinton admin, but the idea has been around even longer than that.

Prior admin's like the Clinton's have reviewed a few countries who have universal healthcare, not just Australia. Germany has the oldest national healthcare. And during Clinton's admin, they looked at Canada's national healthcare system as well.

Switzerland has heavily regulated private insurance in which the regulations keep the private companies from making profits off of the insurance. However, they are allowed to offer supplemental insurance, which they can and do make a profit from.

Australia is simply one of about 31 or 32 developed countries with national healthcare.


Yhe i know all that, im just not seeing any evidence that you all did.

all i see is everybody blaming Obama.

When like you said this has been an issue for yonks.

remember when Michal more made the movie sicko & pointed out Cuba has better health care than the USA.


Watch on youtube.com


HUH? ya lost me. You said that you know all that, but then you go on to say that you're not seeing any evidence that we know that. Yet, I just posted info on it, and you quoted it saying you know that as well as I do.

I don't blame Obama. He's just one card in the deck. We have been headed down this path for quite some time. It's called "Obama Care" because during his administration, the idea of national healthcare is now a law!

And, no, I haven't seen all of MM's movie, Sicko. I have seen part of it. But, not enough that I could comment one way or the other on it.



HUH? Now you have lost me.

Here let me child proof it for you.

In this thread you have posted twice .... out of the dozens of threads on this very topic, not once has anybody mentioned that Obama care is in fact a government policy regardless of who is in the Presidency.

You all keep calling it Obama care & Blaiming Obama for its exsistance.

& several people have posted how Obamacare is socalist tripe & how it will cost Obama the Election.

Again Obama, Obama, Obama.

Not once have i seen any member yourself included ( SmockinJoe ) point out that Obama is not the architect of Obama-care. He is just the messenger.


As for your post.

SmokinJoe wrote:It's called Obama care because his administration worked on it, amended it, and got it passed. Yes, the concept was nurtured and pursued during the Clinton admin, but the idea has been around even longer than that.

Prior admin's like the Clinton's have reviewed a few countries who have universal healthcare, not just Australia. Germany has the oldest national healthcare. And during Clinton's admin, they looked at Canada's national healthcare system as well.

Switzerland has heavily regulated private insurance in which the regulations keep the private companies from making profits off of the insurance. However, they are allowed to offer supplemental insurance, which they can and do make a profit from.

Australia is simply one of about 31 or 32 developed countries with national healthcare.


Where did you say any of that ???
Image
rath
 
Posts: 4344
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Next

Return to General Discussion Topics

  • View new posts
  • View unanswered posts
  • Who is online
  • In total there are 5 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 5 guests (based on users active over the past 10 minutes)
  • Most users ever online was 292 on Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:19 pm
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests