The $1.2 billion cloture vote in the dead of night

posted at 8:48 am on December 21, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Harry Reid passed his cloture bill a few hours ago, forcing the Senate to remain in session while America slept in order to meet an arbitrary deadline for his version of ObamaCare.  As expected after the reversal of Ben Nelson (D-NE), Reid got his bill past its second procedural hurdle, thanks to some arm-twisting … and vote buying:

Landmark health care legislation backed by President Barack Obama passed its sternest Senate test in the pre-dawn hours early Monday, overcoming Republican delaying tactics on a 60-40 vote that all but assures its passage by Christmas. …

The atmosphere was intensely partisan, but the outcome preordained as senators cast their votes from their desks, a practice reserved for issues of particular importance. Administration officials who have worked intensely on the issue watched from the visitor’s gallery despite the hour. So, too, Vicki Kennedy, the widow of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., who championed health care across a Senate career that spanned more than 40 years.

Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson’s announcement Saturday that he had decided to support the bill—in exchange for a variety of concessions—cemented the Democrats’ 60-vote majority behind a bill assembled at the direction of Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

A “varity of concessions”?  There really was no variety in the concessions at all.  Nelson changed his vote when Reid offered new language in his manager’s amendment that would send a boatload of money to Nebraska — and not just to the Cornhusker state, either:

Nebraska will receive $100 million in assistance for its state Medicaid program under provisions in the Senate’s healthcare reform bill negotiated by Sen. Ben Nelson (D).

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) informed lawmakers on Sunday night that the section of the manager’s amendment to the Senate’s health bill would cost $1.2 billion over 10 years.

Nelson managed to win a share of the section of the manager’s amendment on Equitable Support for Certain States, which will provide Nebraska, along with Massachusetts and Vermont, support in paying its share of additional costs to Medicaid in the health legislation.

Massachusetts?  Why would Massachusetts need extra help in paying its Medicaid obligations?  They already have a version of ObamaCare in place, which was supposed to contain and control health-care costs.  Apparently, it didn’t work as advertised — and neither will Reid’s version of ObamaCare either.

When that fails, who will bail out ObamaCare, as Massachusetts needs a bailout now?  Oh, right.  Us.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

I’ve been to France. I’ve read economic statistics. Upper-middle class French people have free health care, free higher education for their kids, one of the best public school systems in the world and six weeks of vacation. They make good money and have better job security. Incomes are lower than in America, and houses are smaller, but the social safety net is better and so are the restaurants. It’s a different choice, but certainly a viable one and the idea that some poor Wal-Mart employee is better off than a French engineer is utterly stupid.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:38 PM

They may have access to free health care, but they pay three or four times as much in taxes to get it. They also have health care that is (or at least was) vastly inferior to what we get in the US. They get six weeks of vacation, then again, they also have unemployment rates that are 3 or 4 times higher than what we have in the US.
They make less as you admit, but everything they buy is much more expensive because of govt taxes.

As I pointed out earlier, the standard of living for even the upper middle class would qualify as poverty line here in the US.

MarkTheGreat on December 21, 2009 at 12:45 PM

It’s nice to see BB admit that the reason this bill had to be passed in hurry was because the more people learn about it, the less they like it.

Even he admits that further debate would have resulted in the bill being killed.

MarkTheGreat on December 21, 2009 at 12:47 PM

I’ve been to France. I’ve read economic statistics. Upper-middle class French people have free health care, free higher education for their kids,

This is where you leave the tracks. Free? Really? Who pays the doctors, nurses and lab technicians, buys the drugs, heats and lights the hospitals? Who pays the teachers, the building custodians, buys the books?

Take a guess: Tax revenue to GDP in USA: 28% In France: 46%.

So all this “free” stuff that they have and we don’t seems to cost them about 18% of their income, using some back-of-the-envelope reckoning.

Furthermore, as should be obvious to all but the economic illiterates, raising taxes is a guaranteed way to lower GDP.

So, to get all this “free” stuff, we’ll pay considerably more tax, have debt that can’t possibly be repaid, and see our standard of living slide. That all sounds bad, but at least we’ll get rationing of medical care, so it’s not all downside.

mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 12:49 PM

It’s nice to see BB admit that the reason this bill had to be passed in hurry was because the more people learn about it, the less they like it.

Even he admits that further debate would have resulted in the bill being killed.

MarkTheGreat on December 21, 2009 at 12:47 PM

This is the bedrock of democracy don’t you know!?!

gwelf on December 21, 2009 at 12:50 PM

So, to get all this “free” stuff, we’ll pay considerably more tax, have debt that can’t possibly be repaid, and see our standard of living slide. That all sounds bad, but at least we’ll get rationing of medical care, so it’s not all downside.

mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 12:49 PM

And this is why Bleeds Blue doesn’t want people to know what this bill does.

gwelf on December 21, 2009 at 12:52 PM

MarkTheGreat on December 21, 2009 at 12:45 PM

I suspect you’ve never been there, or you wouldn’t spread such blather. By any measure, their health care is comparable to ours (by some measures better, by some worse) their incomes are lower and their taxes are higher. Their unemployment rate is — today — lower than ours and tends to hover about 3-4 points above the U.S. in normal times. depending on the exchange rate, prices in France are pretty comparable to U.S. prices, and good restaurant meals (a personal priority)can be far cheaper.

You can make an argument that senior executives and the like have it worse in France, but a department store employee, truck driver or factory worker is much better off in France than here.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:53 PM

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Their GDP per capita is about 75% of ours. Their debt is at 68% of GDP and growing. You know historicaly that France has growth slower than that of our country, so they probably cannot make their economy grow fast enough to make their debt smaller relative to GDP. It birth rate is rather anemic (12.5 births/1000 people, rank 162 in the world). So they will not have a young vibrant labor force to pay for the old (that live longer because they drink red wine). Let’s not forget the Muslim population that appears to resists French societal norms.

France’s next 50 years do not look bright to me on their current course.

WashJeff on December 21, 2009 at 12:53 PM

So, to get all this “free” stuff, we’ll pay considerably more tax, have debt that can’t possibly be repaid, and see our standard of living slide. That all sounds bad, but at least we’ll get rationing of medical care, so it’s not all downside.

mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 12:49 PM

I know I’m weird but my wallet doesn’t care whether my health care is paid for out of taxes dollars or out of money my employer withholds from my salary.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:54 PM

And this is why Bleeds Blue doesn’t want people to know what this bill does.

gwelf on December 21, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Precisely. It’s why the language of the bill is a big secret: the pretense that it is for the good of the American people is patently false.

mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 12:55 PM

WashJeff on December 21, 2009 at 12:53 PM

To be clear: I’m not holding out France as the perfect country, I was just objecting to the idea that it’s some third-world hellhole where upper middle class professionals live worse than the service industry wage-slaves who make up a third of our nation. France is far from perfect, but if I had a choice between working in a Virginia Wall-Mart or a Lyons Carrefour, I’d take the latter job in a second.

(and, it’s another discussion, but I think taxes are probably the least of the problems with the French economy)

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:59 PM

I know I’m weird but my wallet doesn’t care whether my health care is paid for out of taxes dollars or out of money my employer withholds from my salary.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Neither do I, but I most certainly do care how much goes out and what I get in return.

Dark-Star on December 21, 2009 at 1:00 PM

I suspect you’ve never been there, or you wouldn’t spread such blather. By any measure, their health care is comparable to ours (by some measures better, by some worse) their incomes are lower and their taxes are higher. Their unemployment rate is — today — lower than ours and tends to hover about 3-4 points above the U.S. in normal times. depending on the exchange rate, prices in France are pretty comparable to U.S. prices, and good restaurant meals (a personal priority)can be far cheaper.
Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:53 PM

This is fantastic – I only wish Democrats in office were as honest as you but somehow I think they know it would be even bigger political suicide:

“Pass ObamaCare because it will give healthcare to everyone but we’re going to reduce the standard of living, tax everyone a lot more and our employment rate will never be as low as it once was!”

gwelf on December 21, 2009 at 1:01 PM

what happened to a Republican requiring a reading of the bill?

infidel2 on December 21, 2009 at 1:03 PM

This is fantastic – I only wish Democrats in office were as honest as you but somehow I think they know it would be even bigger political suicide:

“Pass ObamaCare because it will give healthcare to everyone but we’re going to reduce the standard of living, tax everyone a lot more and our employment rate will never be as low as it once was!”

gwelf on December 21, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Sadly for your argument, health care is not the larger determination of economic growth in France. In fact, given that it’s about a third less expensive than it is in the U.S., it’s likely that it’s a boost for their economy.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 1:07 PM

Sadly for your argument, health care is not the larger determination of economic growth in France. In fact, given that it’s about a third less expensive than it is in the U.S., it’s likely that it’s a boost for their economy.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 1:07 PM

If socialism so so cheap then why are their taxes higher?

gwelf on December 21, 2009 at 1:10 PM

I know I’m weird but my wallet doesn’t care whether my health care is paid for out of taxes dollars or out of money my employer withholds from my salary.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:54 PM

That’s probably only because, evidently, you have no concept of value-for-money. I’ve lived with socialized medicine. Think crowded waiting rooms, with grubby walls, slashed upholstery, insufficient clerical staff, indifferent, English-challenged doctors, months-long waiting lists for surgery.

I could go on and on with stories about relative value for money, but it would make most people sick.

You may not care whether you pay premium prices for grade-B medical attention, but most other people do.

mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 1:11 PM

Sadly for your argument, health care is not the larger determination of economic growth in France. In fact, given that it’s about a third less expensive than it is in the U.S., it’s likely that it’s a boost for their economy.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 1:07 PM

OK, now you are just making stuff up. Show proof that health care equal to, (or better than what is available here in the US in your one post above), what we have in the US is only 1/3 the cost in France.

Johnnyreb on December 21, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:59 PM

France has choosen a form of socialism in their country. That choice has resulted is less (relative to the USA) per capita income, less economic growth, less innovation, etc. This probably has created less economic disparity in France, an objective of liberal philosphy, but at what cost? That cost will be felt over the next 50 years as their welfare state collapses, or, at best, greatly diminishes their standard of living do to tax\debt loads.

No, France is not a hell-hole. Paris sure looked nice when I was there 15 years ago. unless changes are made, I do no think it will be as nice 50 years from now (and not due to AGW).

WashJeff on December 21, 2009 at 1:13 PM

OK, now you are just making stuff up. Show proof that health care equal to, (or better than what is available here in the US in your one post above), what we have in the US is only 1/3 the cost in France.

Johnnyreb on December 21, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Actually, he said 1/3 less, so it’s 2/3 the cost.

mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Bleeds Blue, you have no CLUE what you speak of when it comes to health care. You can rob your bank on this one.

When that fails, who will bail out ObamaCare, as Massachusetts needs a bailout now? Oh, right. Us.

We’ll be China’s serfs.

Schadenfreude on December 21, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Actually, he said 1/3 less, so it’s 2/3 the cost.

mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Thanks for pointing out my error. My original point still stands though. Care equal to what we have in the US for 2/3 the cost.

Johnnyreb on December 21, 2009 at 1:16 PM

OK, now you are just making stuff up. Show proof that health care equal to, (or better than what is available here in the US in your one post above), what we have in the US is only 1/3 the cost in France.

Johnnyreb on December 21, 2009 at 1:12 PM

I said it was a third less expensive, not a third of the cost.

Statistics here.

And, not saying it’s better, but that it’s comparable. A nice little article from Business Week here.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 1:20 PM

Thanks for pointing out my error. My original point still stands though. Care equal to what we have in the US for 2/3 the cost.

Johnnyreb on December 21, 2009 at 1:16 PM

Well, good luck waiting for that. Judging from my experience with Canada and Australia, the care is nowhere near what is available here. If it were, why would medical tourism to the US be such big business in both those countries?

mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 1:20 PM

And, not saying it’s better, but that it’s comparable. A nice little article from Business Week here.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 1:20 PM

So are you saying the current Demcare monstrosity gives us the French system?

mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 1:22 PM

Americans also subsidize the lower cost of drugs in France. France dictates to companies what they can sell their drugs for – and Americans foot the bill when the same drugs are sold here.

gwelf on December 21, 2009 at 1:26 PM

Yeah, a suburban kid whose dad went to college on the GI bill and a West Virginia girl. We’re elitist as all hell. Her husband, interestingly enough is a solid conservative who — in between bitching about the Packers’ loss — supplied the anti-health care argument for purposes of balance. This legislation has been 15 or maybe a hundred years in the making, depending on how you measure. Nothing’s getting jammed down anyone’s throat. Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 11:12 AM

So what do you think happened to you to support shoving a bill this bad down America’s throats?

Read the CBO summary on the managers agreement: http://www.atr.org/userfiles/CBO%20Score%20of%20Managers.pdf

I really don’t think you understand what’s in this bill yet.

And I think you misunderstood your friend.

There is no cloture needed to begin debate on the final bill out of conference as before. You will still need 60 to pass it.

Chuck Schick on December 21, 2009 at 1:31 PM

And, not saying it’s better, but that it’s comparable. A nice little article from Business Week here.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 1:20 PM

]

Did you stop reading before this part?

So far France has been able to hold down the burden on patients through a combination of price controls and increased government spending, but the latter effort has led to higher taxes for both employers and workers. In 1990, 7% of health-care expenditures were financed out of general revenue taxes, and the rest came from mandatory payroll taxes. By 2003, the general revenue figure had grown to 40%, and it’s still not enough. The French national insurance system has been running constant deficits since 1985 and has ballooned to $13.5 billion.

Utopia’s a wonderful thing when you don’t have to pay the bills.

Chuck Schick on December 21, 2009 at 1:40 PM

“It is very clear that the bill — the final bill — to pass in the United States Senate is going to have to be very close to the bill that has been negotiated here,” Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said on “Fox News Sunday.” “Otherwise, you will not get 60 votes in the United States Senate.”

Health Plans on collision course

Chuck Schick on December 21, 2009 at 1:41 PM

Utopia’s a wonderful thing when you don’t have to pay the bills.

Chuck Schick on December 21, 2009 at 1:40 PM

Thank goodness France does not have to overly worry about defending themselves. Can’t wait until we cannot defend ourselves either when wealth transfer payments and interest consume our government.

WashJeff on December 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM

THE DAY AMERICA DIED.
Actually, it was the day Obama was elected.
Welcome to 21st century communism. The government is in total control now, so all your worries are over.
Don’t you feel secure?

Cybergeezer on December 21, 2009 at 1:58 PM

So, this is a French Thing? Okay…..

I lived in France for two years: Paris– 32, Avenue Georges Mandel ( Google it ); visited the country many times; studied it’s history and politics and culture.

So…The taxes are very high, the bureaucracy is omnipresent; the restrictions on business are stifling and the health care system depends on where you are and who you are.

“Bleeds’ concedes a false point: No one says its a Third World country, and comparing an engineer to a Wal-Mart clerk is dishonest ( disingenuous at best ). If you compare people occupation by occupation, the French have a lot more taxes, less living space, much more expensive cars ( import duties ) and a peculiar health care system which –because it is peculiarly French ) is difficult to compare with America

Janos Hunyadi on December 21, 2009 at 2:03 PM

The taxing starts immediately, but the bemefits of any health care plan do not start until 2014.
The money taken in will be used by the Democrats to buy more states for their new “government”. All states have been thrown under the bus by the Congress and president.
There is no more United States. They are all on their own and being picked off one by one by the Democrat Party and president for implementation in their new form of government that they are calling America, at present.
We’ll all wake up one morning, in the near future, to find out that the Senate has renamed the United States, overnight, to something more to their liking; like Obama’s Democrat Union, or something like that.

Cybergeezer on December 21, 2009 at 2:10 PM

Who cares how much “free” stuff you get in France. What good is it without LIBERTY! Liberty, which we have just lost, is priceless.

JeffVader on December 21, 2009 at 2:12 PM

This France or England or Canada versus america argument has been had many times. It is like global warming. One can manipulate the data by not counting the rationing, and how one counts different taxes, and how one counts France not paying for its own defense, etc., etc.

It is entirely dishonest. when prominent frenchies get ill – they come to america for treatment. When prominent americans get ill, they do not go to france.

Any honest accounting of France’s system finds it is much more expensive, per capita, then america’s system and a french citizen’s access to care is much less.

But, as always, the left can’t be honest in a debate, b/c honesty never supports their point.

How anyone can claim to be an honest person while advocating on the argument that gov’t running the healthcare system will make it cheaper and more efficient, without egregiously reducing access (rationing), is beyond me. Anyone versed in any kind of logic knows that it is impossible for that to be true. thus, people making that claim are either incredibly stupid, or incredibly dishonest.

Sorry Bleeds Blue – that means you. Explain to me again how gov’t running healtcare will make it cheaper, more effecient, and more accessible for the ordinary person?

Monkeytoe on December 21, 2009 at 2:14 PM

He guys. Ignore bleeds blue. He says “he’s been to France” he didn’t say he ever lived there. You can be anywhere for a short time, see all of the lovely lights and sights, and not not know wit one about the inner workings of the society and the government. Shanghai is a great town–a lot like New York City–but China is a backward nation who’s government imprisons those who oppose the government or the national religion. He is blowing rosy colored smoke out a dark and smell orifice.

Driefromseattle on December 21, 2009 at 2:16 PM

Let me see if I understand this correctly Bleeds Blue. Healthcare in America would be cheaper for everyone, more available and better…but it only works if we turn it over to the government?

If that’s correct then I’d like to inform you that I’m the former Finance Minster of Nigeria and billions of dollars or my country are wrongfully locked up in a banks and I can use your help to free it. I’d even be willing to give you a portion of the funds I free but I’ll require 10,000 dollars in money from you to get things going…

gwelf on December 21, 2009 at 2:26 PM

Sorry Bleeds Blue – that means you. Explain to me again how gov’t running healtcare will make it cheaper, more effecient, and [emphasis mine -- M.] more accessible for the ordinary person?

Monkeytoe on December 21, 2009 at 2:14 PM

You hit it on the head with that one tiny coordinate conjunction, Monkeytoe!

There’s a well-known saying among builders, engineers, theater technicians, mechanics, etc. — broadly put, People Who Make Things: “Fast, cheap, good: Pick any two.”

Right now, broadly speaking, our healthcare system is fast and good, but not cheap. Fast in the sense that anyone can get access to it relatively quickly — in the emergency room (even if you can’t afford to be treated), in getting scheduled for surgery. Good in the sense that as has been pointed out upthread, many more medical tourists come to the U.S. for treatment than leave the U.S. to seek treatment elsewhere.

Government-provided healthcare in those countries that have it can at best be argued as cheap and good, but not fast. At worst, it is not good (patients left on gurneys), not fast (dying on the waiting list for a cancer operation), and not cheap (having to pay a private surgeon to repair the butcher job a government surgeon did).

The proponents of this yet-to-be-written bill are telling us the lie that federally-provided healthcare will be fast, cheap, and good. At best, it can only be two of those things, representing no improvement over the system we have now. At worst, it will be none of those things, and be far worse than what we have now.

Mary in LA on December 21, 2009 at 2:26 PM

“It is very clear that the bill — the final bill — to pass in the United States Senate is going to have to be very close to the bill that has been negotiated here,” Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said on “Fox News Sunday.” “Otherwise, you will not get 60 votes in the United States Senate.”

That’s funny. Does he know any other jokes?

enginemike on December 21, 2009 at 3:12 PM

My dear comrades;
The health care providers shall be commandeered by the “elected” officials, because they have complete control, now, over the entire health care industry, and it’s workers.
If you are scheduled for surgery, and your doctor doesn’t show up, it shall be because he was summoned for a more important individual with the Federal Government Official Health Care Plan.
Enjoy the health you have now, because it shall be the best you’ll ever experience in this life time.

Cybergeezer on December 21, 2009 at 3:13 PM

I am sure Reid switched from the boxtox tax to the suntan tax in order for Bella Pelosi to continue to have that life like subhuman appearance.

SmallGovtGuy on December 21, 2009 at 3:14 PM

The good news about this bill?

1. Granny and all of her friends will get to go their heaven much sooner.

2. Think of all the additional babies will be killed off and won’t have to pay taxes.

3. DC power brokers/reps will get more money to spend (you don’t think they are going to really SAVE the money???

4. We won’t have to worry soon about Cap & Trade or Amnesty or our country……..it’s over.

5. Soon our Holy And righteous American Jesus will say “I gave up Democratic principles to save Democracy.

Barack Obama…..America’s last President.

PappyD61 on December 21, 2009 at 3:15 PM

The “Final Bill” shall be the complete legislative takeover of the United States Healthcare Industry and all it’s workers.
What they are passing is “Healthcare Reform Legislation”, which gives this Congress the complete authority to “reform” the healthcare industry in any fashion they deem satisfactory.
The American legislative process has been totally ravaged by this Congress and president. This Congress is in complete control of the entire government process of the United States of America.
And if you think the people of the United States are going to have any more influence on this government and it’s officials, you are completely retarded.

Cybergeezer on December 21, 2009 at 3:24 PM

If Obamacare is so good for America, Harry & the Democrats would hold this vote during prime time and Obama would force the networks to carry it live. I’m surprised that ABC, NBC, CBS isn’t broadcasting live from the capitol! Instead, like a thief in the dark of night, they vote, coming before the cameras only to complain about the GOP trying to stall the vote. Only ONE possible explanation; the Democrats fear a backlash from voters. Cowards.

TN Mom on December 21, 2009 at 4:19 PM

It’s nice to see BB admit that the reason this bill had to be passed in hurry was because the more people learn about it, the less they like it.

Even he admits that further debate would have resulted in the bill being killed.

MarkTheGreat on December 21, 2009 at 12:47 PM

As linked to here at HA, support increased by 6% in December.

rjl1999 on December 21, 2009 at 4:43 PM

As linked to here at HA, support increased by 6% in December [in one poll].

rjl1999 on December 21, 2009 at 4:43 PM

Chuck Schick on December 21, 2009 at 4:54 PM

For the record:

RE: We dodged a bullet..

No we ate a Beretta.

The bill to which you link, is NOT ‘the bill’. It is the managers amendment to ‘the bill’.

H.R. 3590 Released by Senator Reid in November.

Skandia Recluse on December 21, 2009 at 11:04 AM

You’ve just linked the House healthcare bill (see that “H.R.” in the name? that means House – senate bills have “S.”), it has no bearing on what took place last night in the Senate..
The bill that passed last night was the manager’s amendment to the Senate bill. Though an amendment, it superceded all previous legislative language that was introduced before.

The House and the Senate will have to combine their two versions in conference (unless the House just adopts the Senate language that will pass on the 24th). Either way, the final bill will look MUCH more like the Senate version. Every politician who’s talked to the press from Hoyer in the House to Sanders (the avowed socialist in the Senate) has said this is the case. Everyone knows that a PO will not get the 60 votes needed in the Senate, should it re-emerge in the conference bill.

Trent1289 on December 21, 2009 at 11:14 AM

Check your spectacles, you might have lost them. Read your own link, carefully

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES—111th Cong., 1st Sess.
H. R. 3590

The Bill” originated in the House of Representatives, thus the ‘H.R.’, now under consideration by the Senate, as amended by the manager’s amendment to which you link.

Skandia Recluse on December 21, 2009 at 5:03 PM

Dear Nebraskans,
You people ought to be ashamed of yourselves. The payoff to Nebraska for Ben Nelson’s betrayal of the nation is massive. Would it be too much to ask all of you good folks of Nebraska, who elected this traitor, to get your butts out to Nelson’s office and DEMANd that he reverse himself?

james23 on December 21, 2009 at 5:34 PM

This bill keeps getting better and better. I swear to God that a yes vote on this bill should be an automatic pink slip for whatever Senator does it.

highhopes on December 21, 2009 at 6:22 PM

This Bill is RAAAAACIST!!!! The 10% Tax on white people tanning is reverse discrimination.

I am sure Reid switched from the boxtox tax to the suntan tax in order for Bella Pelosi to continue to have that life like subhuman appearance.

SmallGovtGuy on December 21, 2009 at 3:14 PM

SandyToes on December 21, 2009 at 7:17 PM

Bleeds Blue is a moron. Hey look I just touched Bangladesh on my globe. Anyone have any questions on their health care system? What a twit…his wife probably resembles Klobuchar.

metric on December 21, 2009 at 7:26 PM

I know I’m weird but my wallet doesn’t care whether my health care is paid for out of taxes dollars or out of money my employer withholds from my salary.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:54 PM

================================================

Since you are so in favor of this disaster, then you, and those who think like you, can pay for it. Leave the rest of us alone. We’ll keep our hard earned money.

Danny on December 21, 2009 at 7:58 PM

I know I’m weird but my wallet doesn’t care whether my health care is paid for out of taxes dollars or out of money my employer withholds from my salary.

Bleeds Blue on December 21, 2009 at 12:54 PM

================================================

Since you are so in favor of this disaster, then you, and those who think like you, can pay for it. Leave the rest of us alone. We’ll keep our hard earned money.

Danny on December 21, 2009 at 7:58 PM

Tards like Blue want you to eat the same crap samitch.

CWforFreedom on December 21, 2009 at 8:14 PM

Since you are so in favor of this disaster, then you, and those who think like you, can pay for it. Leave the rest of us alone. We’ll keep our hard earned money.

Danny on December 21, 2009 at 7:58 PM

And any number of people would like to apply that same argument to a certain couple endless wars.

Dark-Star on December 21, 2009 at 10:44 PM

I really don’t know what you real americans are complaining about. You lost badly in 06 and 08. You don’t get to have your way anymore. Welcome to complete and utter irrelevance. Only 7 more years, maybe President HR Clinton will be kinder to you. Doubt it, but dare to dream!

simplesimon on December 21, 2009 at 10:49 PM

simplesimon on December 21, 2009 at 10:49 PM

The Clintoon Clan’s last chance was in 08. America would sooner vote for Falin’ Palin than that shriveled two-faced hag who was both bought off by the healthcare lobbyists and failed by her own incompetance.

Dark-Star on December 21, 2009 at 11:12 PM

So, for some people to get all this “free” stuff, working Americans have to pay considerably more tax, have debt that can’t possibly be repaid, and see our standard of living slide.

mr.blacksheep on December 21, 2009 at 12:49 PM

Was that what you meant to say?

bayview on December 22, 2009 at 1:45 AM

Rush nailed it as usual…. “Liars and prostitutes”. We need to clean all the rotten garbage out of DC.

ultracon on December 22, 2009 at 9:18 AM

I didn\’t read all the comments, but shouldn\’t that headline read Trillion?Cockroach Congress…!

docjohn52 on December 22, 2009 at 1:36 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4