Regardless of how you feel about Obamacare - or any other law - Congress should
not be able to bypass that law by attaching it to other legislation. The President swore to uphold the Constitution - he is completely correct in
refusing to negotiate with Congress as they attempt to bypass it.
Darlene, you're wrong.Republicans don't want to
"refine" the ACA - they want to kill it. They can't muster the
political support to pass a superior alternative to it, so they have resorted to
bald-faced extortion.They essentially want to undo the 2012
election. They lost - the White House, the Senate, and seats in the House, but
they're trying to pretend the election didn't happen.Regardless of who's president or serving in congress, our budgets will
require borrowing. BTW, the deficit has been shrinking lately, and fast.Yes, this shutdown is unnecessary, but it is wholly brought to you by
irrational Tea Party extremists who don't have a clue how to govern our
nation - they only know how to throw a tantrum.
What Obama is showing us is just how unnecessary much of the Federal Government
is. How many of us have seen any impact in our lives because of Obama's
"shutdown"? How many of us care if Harry Reid's tantrum continues
indefinitly? Most of us can and will send a bag of groceries to anyone who is
on Obama's list of unworthy Americans - those that he has chosen to throw
under the bus, those who receive help through WIC and other programs. Obama
must truely hate those people because he and Reid refuse to accept the
House's funding of their programs.Obama is being shown for who
he is - a petty tyrant who will shout and stomp and sulk if he does not get his
way. Reid is being shown for who he is - Obama's pawn who will table any
bill that comes from the House unless ObamaCare is fully funded. America now
knows that two petty tyrants have shutdown the government. The history books
will not be kind to Obama or to Reid. Future generations will group Obama and
Reid with other tyrants from other countries who caused unneeded suffering and
"The president is not willing to make any cuts even though the U.S. has to
borrow money to continue operating. So who is unreasonable? It sounds as if it
might be our president." Well said Darlene!
This president can't miss the chance to raise taxes. Never mind that the
individual mandate is really a tax on low income people, per the Supreme Court
ruling. (The money goes to corporate welfare for big insurance companies and
pharmaceutical companies, a noble cause if ever there was one, wink wink.)Republicans warned the country that if raising taxes on the rich was
accepted, raising taxes on the middle class was next. But with so little middle
class left, Obama went after low income people to fill his cofers in the form of
a tax called the ACA/Obamacare. For the democrats, there can never
be too much tax, on anyone.
The idea that obamacare needs to be delayed is also unnecessary. And it's
not the president throwing the tantrums in this unnecessary fight.
The president will negotiate if the unilateral threat to close and ruin the
government is withdrawn. This is the way it has to be our all minority will
start using this. What if it is repealed and the Democrats are in the Republican
position. It will be okay for them to shut down and threaten the credit to force
refunding and reenactment?
President Obama was elected to two terms, fair and square. The ACA was passed
by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court. Again, fair and square. If
Republicans want to change any of this, they can follow the due process of law.
They don't have the votes to do this, so they're throwing a tantrum
instead.Why should Obama compromise anything? He's the one
playing by the rules.
Ms. Bennett is mistaken in her assertion that the President and the Democrats in
Congress have not been willing to negotiate. Even Fox News weighed in this
issue on their website:"One of the great mysteries of the
current budget crisis is why Republicans did not declare victory and pass a
continuing resolution last week funding government through the end of the year.
"The resolution that is at the root of this crisis already
establishes sequestration-level funding that President Obama and Senate
Democrats have repeatedly said is unacceptably low but which they were willing
to swallow in order to avoid a government shutdown. "That is the
kind of compromise that, under normal circumstances, Republicans should
celebrate." But instead Republicans have ignored this good faith jesture
and put 800 thousand people out of work.And Ms. Bennett is mistaken
in her interpretation of the ACA. All Americans are subject to its laws.
Federal workers will not have to sign up with an insurance exchange because
their employer provides them with health insurance coverage just like every
other American in the same situation. Those without that benefit finally have a
source to get insurance at a reasonable cost.
The Democrats already made a concession by agreeing to the House continuing
resolution budget numbers for everything else, including the sequestration cuts
Democrats would like to undo.
Darlene,Where have you been?The current sequester will reduce
federal spending in the 2013 fiscal year by $85 billion (and by a total of $1.2
trillion over 10 years). "This year sequestration mostly
required agencies to make cuts across the board. Next year the magnitude of the
2013 cuts will be preserved and $19 billion more will need to be cut from the
discretionary budget, So in 2014, some agencies may be spared, while
others may be hit even harder than they were this year.In addition, the
law calls for another across-the-board cut in so-called mandatory spending next
year, a fact often overlooked in budget discussions, according to experts at the
Bipartisan Policy Center."(CNNMoney)Congress, Unions and
everybody is subject to the law. Obama has delayed the employer mandate to give
employers more time to transition. Unions aren't happy because
generous--"cadillac" health care plans they offer members will now be
taxed. I am so sad--and scared, for our country too, because we
have a group of hostage takers who know nothing about governing or the process
What part of the constitution allows the president to make 19 changes in this or
any changes in the law without congressional approval? Obama is NOT upholding
the constitution, he is not King nor is he emperor. Shame on Americans for
sitting by and allowing him to mock the constitution. Imagine if any president
changed all our laws at their political whims. Recipe for dictatorship.
The shutdown isn't over the budget itself (or the CR, to be more accurate),
but it's worth noting that tbe CR at the center of the fight accepts the
terms of the sequester, which is a compromise given the White House's
preference that a more rational approach to spending cuts be hammered out.As to the defunding of the ACA? Why should Obama compromise over
something he's already had enacted and funded and upheld bySCOTUS?
Especially when it's increasingly clear that the root cause of all of this
is a Republican civil war between its governing wing and its nihilist wing.No matter what one's views on ACA happen to be, what's
happening right now should be a deep concern for anyone concerned with the
integrity of the legislative process, and I am puzzled that the self-described
experts on the Constitution who frequently post here haven't understood
this.. It would be a terrible precedent to set, and one with all the potential
to be used against Republicans someday. Don't let this genie out of the
I wonder if the republicans in congress are that bright. If the ACA is as bad as
they say it will be, they should force the implementation of the whole law and
fund it and watch it implode.My guess is that corporations and
businesses are really going to love the ACA. The bean counters at these
companies will figure they can get rid of their employee health plans and make
that much more money.
We have all read, with horror, the news reports of foreign governments that
seized the food, medicine and welfare aid that the citizens of the United States
have paid for with the taxes levied on us; yet, right now, today, two men in our
government have denied welfare, food and medicine that the People have
instructed the House to give to women, infants and children. The House
authorized all government funding that the majority of the people authorized.
The House denied funds to be paid to ObamaCare because a majority of the people
still reject ObamaCare. In this country, Congress is under oath to do the will
of the people. Two men, Obama and Reid, have diverted WIC funding and they have
used government assets to barricade our monuments. The cost of the barricades
exceeds the cost of "guarding" those monuments.Which model
is Obama and Reid following? Their model is foreign to America. What they are
doing is unnecessary. What they're telling us is a lie. Foolish leaders
depend on foolish people. We Americans are not all fools. Obama and Reid will
soon realize that they, themselves, are the "fools".
@Mike RichardsThe Senate authorized all that too and keeps passing their
version of it.Meanwhile the House is engaged in a discussion along
the lines of (borrowed from elsewhere)...Can we burn your house
down?No.How about just the second floor?No.What about
the garage?No.Why won't you negotiate?
When you tell your adversary that you only want to kill him temporarily and that
he can come back to life next year, do you really expect him to negotiate?
How dumb can democrats be? Throwing a tantrum is all they are doing!! The GOP
(house) made a strategic move, in reaction to the president and the senate, and
the implementation of obamacare. The president, in his self indulgent supreme
commander role, is constantly making changes and exemptions for his friends and
supporters, so why cant the GOP do the same thing? Throw your tantrum, I'm
just going to laugh at you. I love the government shut down. We need regularly
scheduled government shutdowns. If you think what the GOP or house has acted
illegally or unconstitutionally, take them to court. Sue them and make the court
order them to recognize your precious obamacare!!
It's not difficult to see two sides of the ACA. There are clearly
advantages and disadvantages to implementing this law. On the other hand,
there is no advantage to shutting down the government. Let's end this
Perhaps the shutdown of the American government will be a good thing. It may
bring enough pain and suffering to the American people that they will change the
American government to a government of the people and discard this undesirable
government of businessmen. A national referendum could end the
argument about health care being a right and whether a private system or
government system would be better. A national referendum could
remove the Bill of Rights for state governments and replace it with a Bill of
Rights for people like the original Constitution and Declaration of Independence
intended. A national referendum could put business into its proper
place as a servant of the people rather than as the master.A
national referendum could do away with the unnecessary state governments and the
multitude of city and town government that exist every couple of blocks. All it would take is a nation wide election where every American as
allowed to vote.
You know the Republicans are first of all not the least interested in governing,
and secondly in a world of hurt because they can't see and thus react
reasonably to reality when they can't take yes for an answer. ECR all
ready mentioned the CR is a Republican victory, but so is the whole ACA. If you
recall the Democratic debate in 2007 was single payer (supported by the
President) versus a private insurance, individual mandate plan (Republican idea)
supported by Hillary Clinton. Obama wins the election, but the private
insurance idea wins the health care debate. If the Republicans had
the least interest in governing they would have stood up declared victory and
joined the discussion of how to implement and administer the program, but what
did they do, they spent 4 years throwing a hissy fit and losing
"negotiation" after negotiation until here we are. What are they
continuing to do? Throw a hissy fit. If they were interested in
governing, they would let the law be, let it be implemented and over time they
probably could get every adjustment they wanted. But no can't do that.
@ pragmatist You can say it was a Hilary victory, but not GOP.
The GOP had almost zero influence and involvement in the obamacare debate. They
were told to "get on the back of the bus, and just come along for the
ride". If the Democrats showed any restraint, or pulled back at all, it was
only because they realized it was obvious that the new law was 100 percent them.
Seriously HaHaHa. There had zero influence because they said no to their own
idea. They didn't have any ideas of how to improve and implement. They
simply said no. Then they said no again, then again. "the new
law was 100 percent them." that's exactly the point Republicans could
have embraced their own idea and joined the conversation they didn't then,
and they aren't now. They couldn't see a win if it smacked them in
the face..oh wait it did and they said no.
one sentence from Barack says it all about the shutdown..."make it
I see...so the reasonable thing for the President and congressional Democrats is
to give into changing a law they have long ago signed into being to appease a
bunch of anti-government zealots who made it very clear long ago they wanted to
shut down the government while asking no concessions in return? Oh you tea
partiers have been spoiled a bit too long when you think you own the country
that much. But, unlike the government of Utah, the government of the U.S. is
largely composed of what we call Democrats. They are not there because nobody
voted for them. And if they give in to the demands of the extreme right on
this, nobody will EVER vote for them again.
patriot: one sentence from Barack says it all about the shutdown..."make it
hurt".Please provide a reference as the only references I can
find are by the GOP and Fox news sayingObama administration is
employing a make-it-hurt strategy.or I'm sure it's 3 words
taken out of context as per usual with conservative quotes, the clue is they
never have a complete sentence, as then your would have a complete quote.