House GOP To Force Vote On The Repeal Of ObamaCare

Loading

We all can’t stand it when Congress puts up a bill that has no chance of passing, but this one deserves to be voted on. The vulnerable Democratic Senators up for reelection in 2012 need to have their votes on record to repeal this monstrosity, in its entirety and piecemeal.

The House will vote next week to repeal the new health care law, making good on a top-tier GOP campaign promise and setting up a showdown with President Barack Obama over his signature domestic policy achievement.

Majority Leader-elect Eric Cantor (R-Va.) announced Monday the timeline for considering the repeal legislation: The bill will post on the Rules Committee website Monday night, the Rules Committee will meet Thursday, and the rule for the debate will be considered on the House floor Friday. The repeal vote will follow on Wednesday, Jan 12.

“Obamacare is a job killer for businesses small and large, and the top priority for House Republicans is going to be to cut spending and grow the economy and jobs,” Cantor spokesman Brad Dayspring said in a statement. “Further, Obamacare failed to lower costs as the president promised that it would and does not allow people to keep the care they currently have if they like it. That is why the House will repeal it next week.”

The repeal effort is not expected to succeed, given that Democrats maintain control of the Senate and the president can veto the legislation. But Republicans could embarrass the White House if they persuade a number of Democrats to vote with them and, over the long term, plan to try to chip away at pieces of the law.

“We have 242 Republicans,” said Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), incoming chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, on “Fox News Sunday.” “There will be a significant number of Democrats, I think, that will join us. You will remember when that vote passed in the House last March, it only passed by seven votes.”

I like Upton’s enthusiasm but there is little chance of it passing:

The partisan split in the House is 242/193 for the GOP; they’d need to draw 48 Democrats to reach two-thirds of the chamber, which is actually 14 more than the number they were able to attract on the original ObamaCare vote last March when the Blue Dog caucus was bigger and anti-O-Care sentiment was at fever pitch. The only suspenseful aspect of this vote is seeing how many of the surviving Blue Dogs who voted no the first time around will stick with their caucus this time in opposing repeal.

But that’s not the point. It’s getting these Democrats on record, especially the vulnerable ones where ObamaCare is not popular, and then start getting the advertisements ready for 2012. The economic impact of ObamaCare needs to be focused on, the fact that increased regulations will and are hurting businesses need to be focused on and a good way to do it is to force ObamaCare into the open all the damn time. I’m with Rush on this one:

…make them, the Democrats and Obama, you make them defend this on the floor of the House, on the floor of the Senate every week in debate and you make Obama veto it every week. Exit poll data shows that health care was number four on the list of concerns of people. The economy was number one. The two are inexorably tied. The economy is gonna go south precisely because Obamacare is gonna be implemented. The economy is already south. So it’s really crucial that this effort to repeal start in earnest and be broad-based as soon as they can get into it.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

This one certainly deserves a vote. It also desereves to be exposed for what it is.
The Demoncrats in the last congress and the MSM failed to tell America what was in this monstrosity!!

If this travesty is not funded it will die all on it’s own. This is just another scam that was foisted onto the back of the Tax Payer by the Ruling Incumbent Elite that now faces some accountability. If it is not funded it will not be implemented. At this point No One knows for sure what this can of worms contains. That is the Crime here.

If I was a Dem, I would ask a simple question:

“The CBO estimates that Obamacare will save about $140 billion in federal spending during the first ten years of its implementation. In addition, the Deficit Reduction Committee report explicitly relies upon those savings and other Obamacare changes in Medicare to get our long term budget under control. If the GOPer cons get their way, and Obamacare disappears tomorrow, what cuts do you GOPers propose making in federal spending to make up that difference? Where do you intend on finding the extra $140 billion in future government spending that you are proposing be put back on the books?”

I love the changes in rules that the House GOPers put through: they now don’t have to answer for the deficit increasing impact of eliminating Obamacare because . . . well, they just don’t want to answer the question, so they won’t.

Err….the Debt Commission has explicitly said that the CBO numbers rely on “large phantom savings” so it’s pretty clear that your talking points have not been thoroughly vetted.

Thanks for playing.

I think the RNC does itself a disservice if it doesn’t append this effort of repeal with clear, concise, and numerous examples of Obamites “lies” in the run up to having this bill “rammed” through congress in a highly partisan way (ie, “we won”). Get the messages and examples out, that Obama is now trying to have the “mandate” classified as a “tax” — which RNC members previously suggested was so for which Obama and his admin previously went on record saying it was not. That the results so far are not even remotely what they sold it on — and show how even common sense reading of it showed this from the beginning but those voices were ignored. The “death panels” and “limited care” that was pointed out as a common result of such systems….ruled by Obama as propaganda, talking points, etc — show how these assessments/concerns were well warranted…and show how the DNC and particularly this white house… made concerted efforts to cover these things up and misdirect information. In other words…”show”/review how all those concerns that were ignored and how they are now coming to pass. Put it side by side..what they said…what they did. And show they were wrong and even that they “knew” they were wrong and tried to hide it in order to ram this through.

If they do those things WHILE they are trying to repeal this, they’ll have success (even if it’s not repealed) in tagging the DNC with what they created and are responsible for. If they just go after it the same way Obama did (ie., “We Won) and try to repeal it…they’ll not do themselves any favor and only give DNC ammo for their next elections talking points — ie., evil, rich repubs trying to take away your healthcare.

And to B-Rob’s point: show how it’s already costing money, that assessments were wrong, and show how the CBO assessment was based on provisions that were not passed, and which were meant to be passed later…but did not pass. ie., it’s “not” going to save money…its going to increase costs. Otherwise, people like B-Rob are just going to continue these talking points over and over and over.

Even the liberal New York Times admitted this about ObamaCare:

They’ve stuffed the legislation with gimmicks and dodges designed to get a good score from the Congressional Budget Office but don’t genuinely control runaway spending.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/09/opinion/09brooks.html

1) The legislation pretended that Congress was about to cut Medicare reimbursements by 21 percent. Of course, that didn’t happen. The Doctor Fix passed as usual. That one dodge meant an extra $300 Billion over what the CBO figured all by itself!

2) Then there is the 10-year/6 year dodge.
One of the reasons the bill appears deficit-neutral in the first decade is that it begins collecting revenue right away but doesn’t have to pay for most benefits until 2014.
That’s 10 years of revenues to pay for 6 years of benefits, something unlikely to happen again unless the country agrees to go without health care for four years every decade!

3) Then there was the EXCISE TAX dodge:
The primary cost-control mechanism and long-term revenue source for the program is the tax on high-cost plans.
But Democrats weren’t willing to levy this tax for eight years!
The fiscal sustainability of the whole bill rests on the naïve hope that a future Congress will have the guts to accept a trillion-dollar tax when the current Congress wouldn’t accept an increase of a few billion!

4) The double use of the same dollars dodge was cute.
The bill uses $52 billion in higher Social Security taxes to pay for health care expansion. But if Social Security taxes pay for health care, what pays for Social Security? OOPS!

5) Remember the subsidy dodge?
Workers making $60,000 and in the health exchanges would receive $4,500 more in subsidies in 2016 than workers making $60,000 and not in the exchanges.
But Obama started handing out exemptions for his UNION buddies and any businesses that he felt an affinity for recently.
More and more exemptions have been in the news.
Totally unconstitutional.
There is no way future Congresses will allow that disparity to persist.
Soon, everybody will get the subsidy.
The inconsistencies in the subsidy dodge means that the program the CBO assessed is not going to get the money the CBO was told it would be getting.

But that’s not the point. It’s getting these Democrats on record, especially the vulnerable ones where ObamaCare is not popular, and then start getting the advertisements ready for 2012.

Yep, it’s all about the 2012 election–just as everything republicans have said and done for the past 2 years was all about the 2010 election.

Maybe if republicans once again have control of the House, the Senate, and the White House after 2012, they’ll finally reveal the specific details of their own solutions.

“The CBO estimates that Obamacare will save about $140 billion in federal spending during the first ten years of its implementation.”

You mean without the $220 billion doc fix?

Without the fix, even greater savings would be realized when no seniors would be able to find anyone to treat them.

But that was your intent all along, wasn’t it? Pretty slick!

Maybe if republicans once again have control of the House, the Senate, and the White House after 2012, they’ll finally reveal the specific details of their own solutions.

Republicans should demonstrate that they’ve learned from Democrats how it’s done- do it behind closed doors

Obamacare has been repealed for at least 222 companies. Why not for the rest of us?

Doc, You don’t have the right Union Card….just sayin…

All construction and renovations of privately owned hospitals had to stop as of 01/01.2011, or they could not bill Medicare for their services, it seems as though the American Hospital Association did not want the competition. As of the first of the years thousands of construction workers are joining the ranks of the unemployed, contracts can no longer be fulfilled and communities are robbed of first class healthcare all in the name of Obamacare. Idiot!

Kenneth Artz of the Heartland Institute explains, “Section 6001 of the health care law effectively bans new physician-owned hospitals (POHs) from starting up, and it keeps existing ones from expanding.” Politico adds, “Friday [New Year’s Eve] marked the last day physician-owned hospitals could get Medicare certification covering their new or expanded hospitals, one of the latest provisions of the reform law to go into effect.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/01/obamacare_stops_construction_a.html

I tried to find the original Poitico article and got this:
http://find.politico.com/index.cfm?clt=p44&key=Construction+Stops+at+Physician+Hospitals

Found this article, describing this section of the bill from an article posted in December:

“… thousands of workers will put down their tools and halt construction at 45 hospitals across the country, simply because the hospitals have physician owners.

“This deadline is unrealistic to the communities these hospitals would serve,” says Physician Hospitals of America (PHA) Executive Director Keri Bolte. “When healthcare reform passed, we were given eight months to finish ongoing projects, even though hospital development takes years to complete. This deadline robs communities of good care and good jobs.”

“Limiting access to top rated hospitals is not ‘reform’ — it is business as usual,” says Michael Russell, MD, PHA president. “Physician owned hospitals are under attack because of their successful patient outcomes, which forces other hospitals to improve to stay competitive. This law limits competition which consequently drives down quality of care.”

To understand the quality of patient care that is in jeopardy, one only needs to look at the government’s own quality rankings – the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS). There are 275 physician owned hospitals in 35 states, compared with more than 5700 hospitals nationwide, and physician owned hospitals rank as the #1 hospital in 19 states.

http://markets.chron.com/chron/news/read?GUID=16213160

The culprits:

This little-noticed but particularly egregious aspect of Obamacare is, by all accounts, a concession to the powerful American Hospital Association (AHA), a supporter of Obamacare, which prefers to have its member hospitals operate without competition from hospitals owned by doctors. Dr. Michael Russell, president of Physician Hospitals of America, which has filed suit to try to stop this selective building-ban from going into effect, says, “There are so many regulations [in Obamacare] and they are so onerous and intrusive that we believe that the section [Section 6001] was deliberately designed so no physician owned hospital could successfully comply.”

Artz writes, “According to Russell, the AHA, along with Sen. [Max] Baucus (D-MT) and Congressman Pete Stark (D-CA), are responsible for the language in Section 6001.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256301/obamacare-nixes-doctor-owned-hospitals-matthew-shaffer

Reducing hospital capacity a time you plan to add demand in the form of 30 million new people is really pure genius.

This is the same policy Obama has for energy. Reduce supply when demand is going up.

@Dc: Does the Patient Protection Plan and Affordable Helath Care Act do anything good in your opinion? These are facts not my opinion:
1. Prohibiting health insurers from denying coverage or refusing claims based on pre-existing conditions
2. Expands Medicaid eligibility
3. Subsides insurance premiums

No let’s repeal it with the “Job-Killing Health Care Law Act”!

What a bunch of idiots! You all have iunsurancde n0w! Wait until your stupid asses dont have any ! Jerks!

@Kareem:

I’m guessing you missed the news….

1. Prohibiting health insurers from denying coverage or refusing claims based on pre-existing conditions
HEALTH INSURERS STOP OFFERING PLANS THAT COVER CHILDREN
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/119823-insurers-drop-childrens-insurance-plans-ahead-of-new-rules
And WHY?
According to the article: The new healthcare law forbids insurers from turning down children with pre-existing conditions starting Thursday.

2. Expands Medicaid eligibility
Medicaid “mission creep.”
The bureaucrats have transformed a program whose original purpose was to aid the poor into a Trojan horse for socialized medicine. The result?
More than 25% of all state spending is for Medicaid!
Maybe that’s part of the reason 26 states are suing ObamaCare.

3. Subsides insurance premiums
I’m figuring you meant ”subsidizes.”
The flaw in this argument is that there really is no nationwide pool of insured people that cross-subsidizes each other’s premiums.
Insurance companies do not cross-subsidize each other.
Add to that Obama has given out 222 separate waivers to all his favorites so they won’t have to abide by the strictures of ObamaCare.
There goes your idea of subsidizing one another.
Too many are being given free passes by Obama.