Congress: no more symbolic votes
Wednesday, Congress voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act and the vote was passed 244-185. This was the 33rd time the Affordable Care Act was put to vote. This was another time it was put to vote for no reason other than for a symbolic statement to show the nation that they disagree with health care reform. The Senate, led by Democrats, is expected to kill the law.
Thanks Congress for spending two days voting on a bill that will go nowhere. I wasn’t quite sure where the Republican Congress stood on the Affordable Care Act after the first 32 times they voted on it, but now after time 33 I think I am clear. You may want to consider time number 34 in case your position slips my mind. Maybe you can put that behind other symbolic things you would like to vote on. I don’t think we’ve voted on whether or not the Eagle is still our national bird lately, or if red, white and blue should still be on our nation’s flag.
I would like to review the last round of campaign commercials from all those voting yesterday and see how many said the phrases, “no more politics as usual”. Yesterday was a perfect example of more politics as usual. Our country can’t afford to waste time symbolically voting on anything. Our economy is still in trouble. Americans still need more jobs and Congress is wasting time on Washington symbolically voting.
Campaign promises were broken yesterday. This isn’t about whether or not you like the Affordable Care Act or if you are a Republican or Democrat, this is about keeping our politicians working in Washington. The politicians talk about not wasting our tax dollars and what they did yesterday was a waste of our time and money. If we owned a business and our employees told us they symbolically worked, we would have to reconsider their employment status. Expect the same from the people who run our country.
Republicans in Congress, your message has been delivered more than enough times. No more symbolic votes. I have to go to work today to support my family and there is nothing symbolic about it. So should you.
George Hunsucker
Northland
10 months, 2 weeks agoOK Ms. Patton, I will agree that there should be no more votes to repeal 0’care AS SOON AS THE SENATE PASSES A BUDGET.
I don’t recall a blog of yours bemoaning the FACT the Senate has not fulfilled its legal and moral duty to pass a budget, but I probably missed it huh?
In less then 120 days America has a choice whether to keep 0’care or repeal it—I think this FACT needs to be kept in front of the American people very forcefully. If not, we have another unfunded entitlement with a big price tag and one which pushes us closer to being bankrupt Europe II. However, I think this is fine with jimmy II….
Cyndy Anderson Moneymaker
10 months, 2 weeks agoWell said, Aimee. The Repubs ran on jobs, jobs, jobs in 2010. So far all I’ve seen is obstruction, obstruction, obstruction. They are not doing their job with these symbolic votes and they know it. These votes are to appear as if they are doing something. We know they don’t want to do anything to help the economy because that would benefit the President’s re-election. Or as I like to call it; screw the country now so we can win back the White House.
As for all the concern about spending; where was the outcry about GWB and his unfunded wars and his tax cuts? Oh, but that was OK because he was your guy. Right?
JR Beillenhouser
10 months, 2 weeks agoAm I missing something…Is someone in the KC area giving out free weed. They must be and only to liberals.
The obsructionism is being done in the senate. The house keeps passing bills but the senate refuses to act on them.
And Cyndy, where is the complaining about spending. Obama has now spent as much as GWB in 4 years. Oh, but that was OK because he is your guy. Right?
For the record, I’ve been against spending from everyone. And I was no Bush fan, but given him or Obama, the choice is clear. Obama is the worst president in the history of this country.
George Hunsucker
Northland
10 months, 2 weeks agoThanks for the morning chuckle Cindy… Spoken by a person who supports the Senate not passing a budget for over 1,100 days. You must be soooooooooooooooooooo proud of their inaction as the country spins out-of-control….
George Hunsucker
Northland
10 months, 2 weeks agoI wonder if this could be why the House continues keeping the topic in front of people Ms. Patton?
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/cnn-cherry-picks-its-poll-results-support-dubious-claim_648461.html
Mark Hastert
10 months, 2 weeks agoCBS put “Cost to Taxpayers” on screen Wednesday night as CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley worried about how much it cost taxpayers for the House to repeal the law again and again. Pelley relayed how “the Congressional Research Service tells us that the House of Representatives costs us $24 million a week. So with two weeks spent repealing the law, that comes to a little under $50 million.”
That’s a lot of symbolism from a party running on fiscal responsibility.
Kent Mueller
10 months, 2 weeks agoMark, that’s a lot of bogus money being used in a bogus argument. You and Pelley look at that vote as if it was the first symbolic vote in the history of the House. Do you and Pelley really think people are stupid enough to believe that?
Even if those number had efficacy, which they don’t. The entire House budget can be attributed to one bill? When people like Pelley present partisan arguments like that masqueraded as news they lose all legitimacy as news journalists. Almost as bad as Andrea Mitchell. But not quite.
JR Beillenhouser
10 months, 2 weeks ago$50 million is alot less than the alternative. What is the new CBO projection about ObamaCare? It is currently at 3x what the original estimate was quoted. And who said that original estimate was bull? The Tea Party. They were correct …. again. Who used to quote that original CBO estimate…Mark Hastert.
Mark Hastert
10 months, 2 weeks agoGee guys, I don’t know. If the focus of the House was collectively 80 Hrs and it cost $X/Hr to run the House then I’d have to say it was pretty expensive theater. That’s money that could have been used for repairing a bridge or paving an interstate or shoring up the Medicare Trust Fund.
It doesn’t reflect well on a party that claims to be fiscally responsible but that’s all for show too.
As for that CBO estimate you never fail to tell only 1/2 the story. The CBO estimated that compared to the existing system more than $100billion would be saved in the first decade.
Yes we’ll spend more mostly because we have a huge bubble of baby boomers coming on board. If we’d switch to a single payer system we’d save even more.
What I never understood is, if the private system is supposed to be so efficient why does it cost more and why is the US system less effective that most other developed nations?
Steven Ward
10 months, 2 weeks agoThe current ‘private system’ is NOT efficient. If you have been paying any sort of attention, you may have heard leaders from the GOP state that they agree that the current system needs to be fixed, but not this way.
ObamaCare has not and does not address the primary weakness in this system, which is escalating costs. If we can’t afford the current system, how is adding more beneficiaries to it by expanding Medicare without addressing costs any more efficient?
How is asking the Middle Class to bankroll 75% of this going to allow our economy to grow? Sure we would all like a Cadillac health care system, but we’ve got a 10 year-old Kia that’s out of warranty budget.
Think about it: Why do you liberals always assume that somebody else should pay for what you think is your right to have? And while we’re at it, we should smile until it hurts, right?
Kent Mueller
10 months, 2 weeks agoMark, you speak of telling half the story. The other half of the CBO estimate story that you neglected to include is that the CBO does not make determinations other than the results of crunching the numbers given to them by congress. The Democrats gave numbers using now refuted estimates to the CBO. The savings were a mirage, at best.
And are you really arguing that the money used for utilities in the Capitol can be redirected to pay for a bridge? I mean do we really want to be turning the utilities on and off like that? What a sham of an argument.
And did I hear Mark indicate that Medicare needs shoring up. I do believe he said that. That must mean that Medicare is unsound and in need of reform. Unfortunately the Democrats scream when that is discussed.