I contacted my congressman!!!

[fuhr52]

You can't believe any money numbers the government puts out. They live in a zero sum would. If you want less of something tax it. So if you have less of something you will get less revenue as time goes on. They never figure this way. They expect people will continue their activity and pay the tax, thus the revenue continues. Doesn't work that way. Look at everything else they touch, medicare, medicaid, social security, post office, welfare, passenger trains, the list goes on.

[nogods]

I'm definitely up to speed, and there will be provisions ADDED to the bill, not taken out. The CBO report is a joke...it doesn't cover the true bill, only the parts that the CBO was given.

And I think you answered your own question - you're absolutely right! the House is using deem-and-pass EXACTLY because the bill would be stalled by the Republicans in an up-and-down vote. They're not afraid of the strict vote - they want it. And lastly, the Constitution (although it has been violated numerous times by both parties) specifically states in Article 1, Section 7 that a bill cannot be passed without being voted on by both the Senate and the House. I'd say the Republicans are well aware of the Constitution. And in this case, where so much is at stake, I will guarantee that lawsuits will be forth-coming on Monday if this bill is rammed through like this.

Sounds like you're FOR the bill, nogods. Is this a troll?

You either don't understand the legislative process or are purposely posting gibberish to deflect attention from the real problem.

Normally, the Senate would pass a bill and then the House would pass its own bill, then the conference committee would iron out the differences and a final version of the bill would return to the Senate and the House for up-or-down votes.

The Senate Republicans have stated that they would use filibuster to prevent any up-or-down vote on a conference committee bill. Thus, the Senate Republicans are the ones preventing the normal method of enacting legislation from occurring.

In the alternative to the normal methods, which can't be used because 41% of the Senate is preventing 59% of the Senate from holding an up-or-down vote, the House can pass the Senate bill instead of its own, and then the Senate can use the reconciliation process to produce a final version of the bill to be presented to the House for final vote by the House.

The House Republicans can't filibuster the house vote, so the House will actually get to vote up-or-down on the final version of the bill, unlike the Senate who won't get to vote up-or-down because the Senate Republicans are preventing such a vote with filibuster.

The deem and pass procedure is being used by the House merely to get the Senate bill back to the Senate for reconciliation. None of which would be necessary if the Senate Republicans were not blocking an up-or-down vote in the Senate on a conference committee bill.

The Senate Republicans' clamor for an up-or-down vote in the House on the Senate bill is disingenuous given that it is the Senate Republicans who are blocking and up-or-down vote in the Senate.

As for your troll remark - do you define a troll as anyone who posts something that hurts your ears?

[Bohemian]

Bottom Line According To The U.S. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), Last Night On Fox News, IF the House votes on the Senate Version of ObamaCare; THIS SUNDAY... TOMORROW... that already passed the Senate on Christmas Fricking Eve last year; without asking for any changes, which is the only way it can pass at this point; then it goes STRAIGHT TO Obama's Desk For Signature INTO LAW...

AS IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, ALL 2,500 PAGES + OF IT...

No IF'S ANDS OR BUTTS...

That's the facts & the reality of it, no matter whom try's to obfuscate it in any way, shape or form...

The Senate Reconciliation Bill is pure mythology; because it cannot be passed unless the X-MAS EVE unchanged Senate bill is voted on this Sunday AS IS, by a Majority in the U.S. House and signed into law by Obama...
Further, the Senate Reconciliation has zero chance of being passed anyway; in the Senate because of Scott Brown #41...

YouTube - Boehner on Hannity: Will Democrats Vote With Their Constituents or With Speaker Pelosi?

http://republicanleader.house.gov/Ne...umentID=177303

NoBamaCare

Call & Fax the Local & D.C. offices of Your Representative in the U.S. House, regardless of how many times you have done so already...
Representative Offices - United States House of Representatives, 111th Congress, 2nd Session

The U.S. Capitol Switchboard: (202)224-3121 operator will transfer you to the Representatives office you request... if its busy or mail box is full, call & fax their local & D.C. offices listed at the link aforementioned...
NOBAMACARE !!!

[AvidshooterTX]

I think you are getting too hung up on parties. I used to vote Republican all the way and boy was I snookered. They're taking us to socialism too, only at a slower pace. Both sides have used these parliamentary tricks in the past. Neither side respects the Constitution nor the will of the people. How much real difference is there between John McCain and his dead friend Ted? I will be voting against ALL incumbents in the Fall, regardless of political affiliation.

[Bohemian]

I think you are getting too hung up on parties. I used to vote Republican all the way and boy was I snookered. They're taking us to socialism too, only at a slower pace. Both sides have used these parliamentary tricks in the past. Neither side respects the Constitution nor the will of the people. How much real difference is there between John McCain and his dead friend Ted? I will be voting against ALL incumbents in the Fall, regardless of political affiliation.

Not all Republicans are bad, although I do agree with your assessment of McCain...

Currently there are 8 RINO's in the U.S. Senate...
33 Good Incumbents...

Whereas, every stinking Democrat in the Senate has to fricking go...
ZERO Good Incumbents...

About 216 Bad Democrats in the House...
And again only a handful of bad RINO Republicans in the house...

Vote on the individual, not the party...

I am a conservative that happens to vote republican most of the time...

In 30 years of being voting age; I Voted Democrat NEVER, Independent Once (Ross Perot), and Republican the rest...

The Reality is that if a candidate cannot poll within 5% of the leader(s) in any race they do not have a snow balls chance in hell of winning; nothing has proved that better then Ross Perot... and we got stuck with Slick-Willie because of it; and he was a lot worse then read my lying lips H.W. Bush...
I for one will not waste another vote on a candidate that CANNOT WIN...
Regardless of how much I am in agreement with them...

Yes, John McCain is a RINO/Moderate and I personally have never been so at odds with a Republican Candidate then I am with John McCain; but he would be a whole lot better then the current Clueless, Socialist In Chief & Company...

I will always do what I can to support the candidate(s) that have the best position & record on the Constitution; but I like everybody else has to face the facts; We have to vote for the best candidate(s) that CAN WIN...

Until more people, stop thinking we cannot discuss religion or politics with anybody, and get off the couch and away from the computer and stop being closet conservatives, that is the way its going to be for the foreseeable future...

Its that way of thinking that has allowed the Liberal Nut Jobs to kick our arse's; they put their money & actions behind their mouth in what they believe in...

Register to vote, and vote in ALL elections big & small, and encourage others to do the same on a daily basis...

[AvidshooterTX]

If you get a candidate you didn't want to begin with then you surely have wasted your vote. That's my point. Bush senior was a new-world-order, big government guy and a liar to boot (read my lips). If everyone would wake up and vote for the candidate that best represents them then the 3rd party candidates would have a chance. Of course, there's no guarantee that they would be any better.

I think we'd be better off just picking people at random (using a computer) to represent us, sort of like a jury. They would get one and only one term and then have to go back and live under the laws that they made. No campaigns, no career politicians. I'd trust our future to a regular folk picked at random over the likes of Barney Frank any day.

All expenses in Washington paid and a salary to cover keeping their home while they are serving. Plus we could make it a law that their job has to be held so that they can return to it when done in congress.

[Bohemian]

If you get a candidate you didn't want to begin with then you surely have wasted your vote. That's my point. Bush senior was a new-world-order, big government guy and a liar to boot (read my lips). If everyone would wake up and vote for the candidate that best represents them then the 3rd party candidates would have a chance. Of course, there's no guarantee that they would be any better.

I think we'd be better off just picking people at random (using a computer) to represent us, sort of like a jury. They would get one and only one term and then have to go back and live under the laws that they made. No campaigns, no career politicians. I'd trust our future to a regular folk picked at random over the likes of Barney Frank any day.

All expenses in Washington paid and a salary to cover keeping their home while they are serving. Plus we could make it a law that their job has to be held so that they can return to it when done in congress.

I agree with your sentiment, but not your logical fallacy...

H.W. Bush with all his faults; was exponentially better then Slick-Willie Clinton or Carter or Obama...
And as a Marine I served under Carter, Reagan, Both Bush's, and Slick Willie...

As a soldier, I respected "W" the most, regardless of the things I disagreed with him on, such as the Patriot Act...

The only time we get to vote for the candidate we as individuals like the best is during the Primary/Caucuses etc...
Once general elections come along we have to vote for the best candidate(s) remaining that can win...

I am not saying I like it, but it is what it is at this point in time...

I am not opposed to 3rd party, I would have voted for Ron Paul if more then 2% of the voting public intended to do the same and he could poll within 5% of the leader(s)...
But he did not...

IF we want somebody different, regardless of party we have to get more people in the process...
AND talk about THE PROCESS OFTEN...

Until such time, we have to vote for the best candidate(s), regardless of party that CAN WIN...

AND that my friend is no waste of a vote...

And for the Record I have not found a politician from any party (including Ron Paul) that I was with 100% on every issue in my lifetime; the first one that I find that passes my personal Conservative Litmus Test 100% is Grover Cleveland...

best regards.

[nogods]

It would really only take one election to clear things out.

If every House incumbent and every Senator that was running for re-election lost either in their primaries or the general election (or even just 60% of them), we would see a huge change in attitude of those remaining.

Many of those remaining might decide that making a career out of politics isn't certain enough to risk. Cleaning house every few years would be better than what we have now.

Never vote for the incumbent, no good can come from it - Abbie Hoffman

[fuhr52]

Another way to clean house would be to take away their perks and retirement package. The founding fathers had no intention of making political offices a career. Too good to ever happen.

[Tea For One]

Did it this morning, thanks!! Gave them quite an earful, respectfully of course.

tfo