Official Shutdown Thread

[Reynod]

It was passed previously ... is there too many pages for someone to read out aloud to the Republicans?

 

[riser]

Its not about wiping out private insurance ... its about makign sure the poor can access a private insurance policy too ... isn't it?

Judge a bill/law not by its intent, but by the results.

We're sold that it offers affordable healthcare to poor people. The question is, what is affordable? $300/month?

One person I know applied and went through most of it. It was $329/month for him and his wife (he's early 40s, she might be last 30s or 40) and his 2 kids.

Now, that is affordable I guess. Except he's making $15/hr and he doesn't receive any subsidies because he makes too much.

People are signing up thinking it's going to cost them $25/month, $50/month, not a couple hundred.

That is a huge detachment of our political system against the reality of what poor truly is. Poor is people who don't have an extra $50 at the end of the month. To a poor person, $50 is expensive. To political figure heads, $300 month is affordable.

 

[wanamingo]

I see a lot of rhetoric here.... especially from you MU (Herman Cain is a nutjob) and not a lot of info.....

Here is part of the problem, my healthcare isnt going to change at all, its staying completely the same. The company I work for already provides healthcare so nothing changes for us or any of our employees (I had a chat with HR and our accounting guy).

So its hard for me to reconcile all of your anecdotal stories about your coverage going up. Do your employers not offer healthcare already?

Anyone else find it kinda weird your job covers your health insurance? Why not car insurance?

 

[wanamingo]

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/recent-business/a-political-crisis

I love Bernie Sanders.

Charles and David Koch, the billionaire brothers with the second biggest fortune in America, are threatening to bankroll primary campaigns by Tea Party extremists challenging Republicans in Congress who don’t go along with their crusade to undo the Affordable Care Act, Sen. Bernie Sanders said on Saturday during a 90-minute presentation at The New Yorker Festival. Then on Sunday The New York Times published a report detailing how the Kochs and others bankrolled a coalition of conservative activists pushing to repeal the health care law and threatening Republicans who won’t go along with closing the government to try to get their way.

It’s “a political crisis,” Sanders said of the shutdown. It is part of a Koch-funded campaign to annul the law that passed Congress four years ago and was upheld by the Supreme Court and was a key issue in the 2012 presidential campaign that President Obama won by 5 million votes. And it is about more than trying to unwind what the American people decided through the democratic process, Sanders stressed.Their agenda is to end Social Security and Medicare, abolish the minimum wage, destroy the EPA and undo every other program enacted in the past half century to protect working families in America, Sanders added.

This is the reasoner Boehner (hehe) is acting like a dick (hehe).

www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/01/why-boehner-doesnt-just-ditch-the-right/

 

[MU_Engineer]

Talk about nutjobs and rhetoric- you mention Bernie Sanders and the Koch Brothers conspiracy.

 

[wanamingo]

Yes its a conspiracy that the Koch brothers bankrolled the tea party, I mean their "political organizations" only gave hundreds of millions to conservative candidates and running ads against Obamacare.

In many respects it is. What’s going on right now. We have seen some moderate, moderate conservative Republicans having the guts to stand up to Boehner and say,ok, we don’t like Obamacare, but you know what? We don’t think you should shut down the government. We are prepared to vote for a clean CR, Continuing Resolution.

What’s happening now, as I understand it, is when moderate Republicans are saying that, or thinking about standing up to Boehner, the extreme right wing is coming around saying you do that, let me tell you what’s going to happen. We have the Koch brothers behind us. We have hundreds of millions of dollars behind us, and if you dare to support a Continuing Resolution, a clean CR. We’re gonna primary you. We have unbelievable sums of money to defeat you.

So what you are looking at now is what Citizens United is all about. And that is giving a handful of billionaires, the Koch brothers and others, incredible power to tell members of Congress what they can and can not do, very dangerous.

What do you think of the above quote from Sanders? You thihnk conservatives would love some Bernie. Hes the only independent Senator, VT has some of the loosest gun laws, healthiest citizens, high education rate, low poverty rate, and great environmental record. And Herman Cain ran a pizza place....

 

[riser]

I see a lot of rhetoric here.... especially from you MU (Herman Cain is a nutjob) and not a lot of info.....

Here is part of the problem, my healthcare isnt going to change at all, its staying completely the same. The company I work for already provides healthcare so nothing changes for us or any of our employees (I had a chat with HR and our accounting guy).

So its hard for me to reconcile all of your anecdotal stories about your coverage going up. Do your employers not offer healthcare already?

Anyone else find it kinda weird your job covers your health insurance? Why not car insurance?

History lesson:

Companies started offering benefits to employees to help a candidate to decide to work for them. Both companies pay the same money, but one offered benefits in order to draw the person to work for them.

Enter government: Now they mandate coverage.

Your healthcare will stay the same. Mine stays the same right now as well. You're locked into the program for a year at least.
There will be a lot of factors in if/how your healthcare will change. That's not to say the costs won't go up next year - or if you're just supporting yourself and not a wife/child, chances are your benefits won't change. Coverage for a single person isn't that bad.

If you're a single person you're probably paying $40-$80 biweekly, or $80/160 a month and your company is probably covering $100-$200 additional a month. On the ACA, coverage for a single person will run about $300/month. That's because a company isn't there covering a portion of the cost, so the individual has to cover the entire cost.

Add in a wife or a kid, then you have to have maternity coverage whether you want kids or not, mental health coverage, and a few others.

http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_24248486/obamacares-winners-and-losers-bay-area

Good read for you on your topic.

The law's intent is to cover people who are now uninsured by making insurance accessible to everybody. But that means rates will rise for many because sick and healthy people will now be charged the same premium.

The law also will often make some policies more expensive because it limits out-of-pocket expenses to $6,350 annually for an individual and $12,700 for a family. In addition, the law restricts the minimum and maximum premiums that people can be charged based on their age.

My plan is out of pocket max of $6,000 for a family, $2000 for an individual.

 

[chunkymonster]

Its has already been ruled constitutional. It has followed the progression set forth by the constitution. Obviously, you guys don't agree with it but saying it should be ruled unconstitutional accomplishes nothing.

Technically, the ACA is not constitutional. There are two standing questions of constitutionality.

1) The only reason it was declared constitutional by the SCOTUS was because Justice Roberts changed the verbiage in the law to read "tax" instead of "fine" as it was originally written by the Seante. However, there is no powers relegated to the SCOTUS to change the verbiage of a bill or law written by the Congress. Since the SCOTUS does not have the power to write bills or law, Roberts changing the verbiage was un-constitutional and an egregious over-step of SCOTUS authority.

As proof, I refer you to the Social Security Act of 1935 and ask you why the SCOTUS kicked the Act back to Congress to be re-written.

2) Article 1, Section 2, the apportionment clause states that all taxes shall be levied equally among the States and the whole number of free persons in each State. President Obama unilaterally decided to delay the taxes to Corporations (which are legally considered a person) which unequally apportions the tax burden to the individual. Also, the President doe not have the constitutional authority to determine which segment of the people taxes are levied upon; this power is relegated wholly to the Congress.

But who cares, right?!?! The Constitution is just an out-dated piece of paper written by rich white landowners and has nothing to do with securing freedom, equality under the law, and liberty for all citizens.

 

[chunkymonster]

Why don't house republicans just pass a temporary budget for 3-6 weeks and continue to work on the greater budget deal? Why does there have to be a shutdown? If you look at it from a logical point of view there is only one reason why they would want a shutdown. "Leverage". They are using the shutdown as leverage to get their way. Its as simple as that. The senate republicans know better but they can't control the radical conservatives in the house. Boehner is stuck between a rock and a hard place as well.

I hope the next few elections bring in some more reasonable house republicans. There will always be a need for a conservative point of view but there needs to be intelligence behind it, an example of what we don't need would be Cruz.

This entire comment is ironic given the Democrat controlled Senate has not even voted on a Federal budget in the past five years Obama has been President. House Republicans have voted on and passed a federal budget every year since Obama has become President.

And you want House Republicans to pass a temporary 3-6 week budget?!?! HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Even if House Republicans passed a temporary 3-6 week budget, the Senate Democrats wouldn't vote for it anyway!

Hell, the Senate Democrats don't even vote for the budgets Obama proposed to them. They can't even agree with their own party leader, let alone vote for any budget passed by the House Republicans!

It's obvious you have not been paying attention to what has been going on...

 

[wanamingo]

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/102685/conservative-defense-obamacare-affordable-care-health

Because the 16th amendment Chunks.

 

[chunkymonster]

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/102685/conservative-defense-obamacare-affordable-care-health

Because the 16th amendment Chunks.

You prove my point for me Mingo...the CONGRESS not the President...shall have the ability...it was President Obama who by-passed Congress to determine that Corporations were not subject to the tax.

 

[riser]

My former employer was notified today to start the official shut down process. Furlough notices start this week and next week for non-essential employees. Probably 1/5th of the employees are exempt and another 2/5ths are probably essential.

 

[johnsonma]

This entire comment is ironic given the Democrat controlled Senate has not even voted on a Federal budget in the past five years Obama has been President. House Republicans have voted on and passed a federal budget every year since Obama has become President.

And you want House Republicans to pass a temporary 3-6 week budget?!?! HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Even if House Republicans passed a temporary 3-6 week budget, the Senate Democrats wouldn't vote for it anyway!

Hell, the Senate Democrats don't even vote for the budgets Obama proposed to them. They can't even agree with their own party leader, let alone vote for any budget passed by the House Republicans!

It's obvious you have not been paying attention to what has been going on...

I swear you live in your own little world, you must see Glenn Beck a lot.

If they passed any budget that funded the healthcare law that was ALREADY passed by congress and RULED constitutional by the supreme court then we wouldn't be here right now. They are refusing to fund something that has already been passed by holding the American people hostage. Its really that simple but I don't blame you for not understanding that because of the BS that has been force fed to you by Fox and the like.

 

[riser]

Technically John, they're not refusing to fund the ACA. They're refusing to implement the individual mandate and tax. Let's make sure everyone is clear on why the government is shut down. The GOP doesn't want the individual mandate and tax/fine in place for 1 year.

2 sides to that coin. The Dems need it in place to force people into signing up to generate revenue and show success. The GOP doesn't want people forced into making unwise financial decisions and/or getting stuck paying an additional tax/fine for not being able to afford to sign up.

 

[wanamingo]

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/102685/conservative-defense-obamacare-affordable-care-health

Because the 16th amendment Chunks.

You prove my point for me Mingo...the CONGRESS not the President...shall have the ability...it was President Obama who by-passed Congress to determine that Corporations were not subject to the tax.

Im not sure what your point is Congress passed the ACA ....

 

[wanamingo]

Technically John, they're not refusing to fund the ACA. They're refusing to implement the individual mandate and tax. Let's make sure everyone is clear on why the government is shut down. The GOP doesn't want the individual mandate and tax/fine in place for 1 year.

2 sides to that coin. The Dems need it in place to force people into signing up to generate revenue and show success. The GOP doesn't want people forced into making unwise financial decisions and/or getting stuck paying an additional tax/fine for not being able to afford to sign up.

But that isnt what the people want, its not what they voted for. I see more of a fear that Obamacare will actually work. The republicans are working against the democratic process, they are becoming more and more of a vestigial limb thats on its way to being removed.

How is having healthcare an irresponsible financial decision? It more unwise not to be covered at all! Besides if you are so poor that you cant front the 95$ fine then maybe you should refrain from throwing your thoughts into the public sphere.

Heres the fine for 2014 if you decide not to participate.

$95 per adult, plus $47.50 per child, max $285 or 1% of income

 

[riser]

Here's the deal. Government is mandating that everyone has to have insurance.

The number one issue many people see with this is that the government is forcing everyone to purchase something. What stops the government from forcing everyone into buying auto insurance then? It has to be across the board right so everyone has to have it. That's the biggest issue and where the Constitution comes into play.

Let's get over that bump for the moment. For the family living paycheck to paycheck, what is affordable? To mandate that they purchase health insurance, in my opinion, puts an unnecessary financial burden on them. If they can't afford it, their first year they pay $95 fine. The second year, they pay 2.5% of their income.

Strike the mandate that everyone has to purchase healthcare. Make it optional and let it loose. People who want insurance will buy insurance, people who do not will not buy. Let people make their own decisions on what is best for them.

It's a game on both ends. The Dems NEED people to sign up to make it appear successful with a high sign up rate.. but they're forcing everyone to do it. The GOP doesn't want to force people into a program they may not want.

The difference: Mandating it or making it Optional.

 

[chunkymonster]

I swear you live in your own little world, you must see Glenn Beck a lot.

If they passed any budget that funded the healthcare law that was ALREADY passed by congress and RULED constitutional by the supreme court then we wouldn't be here right now. They are refusing to fund something that has already been passed by holding the American people hostage. Its really that simple but I don't blame you for not understanding that because of the BS that has been force fed to you by Fox and the like.

Dude, the bill to defund the ACA was rejected...the notion of defunding the ACA is currently off the table, get off that Democrat talking point.

The latest House proposal is to fund the ACA but delay the individual tax just like Obama did for his political contributors and Unions...

The latest House bill, which the chamber backed on a 228-201 vote, would have delayed the law's individual mandate while prohibiting lawmakers, their staff and top administration officials from getting government subsidies for their health care.

So, as of the latest bill, the House Republicans capitulated and funded the ACA but proposed delaying the tax to individuals (just as Obama unconstitutionally delayed the taxes to Corporations and Unions) while stopping Government employees from getting tax subsidies for participating in the ACA, tax subsidies that the individual citizen DOES NOT get

As I said, I do not think you are paying attention to what is going on...

 

[chunkymonster]

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/102685/conservative-defense-obamacare-affordable-care-health

Because the 16th amendment Chunks.

You prove my point for me Mingo...the CONGRESS not the President...shall have the ability...it was President Obama who by-passed Congress to determine that Corporations were not subject to the tax.

Im not sure what your point is Congress passed the ACA ....

If you do not understand that only the Congress can levy taxes and that the President can not pick and choose which segment of the populations pays those taxes, then I can not help you...at all!

 

[riser]

Technically John, they're not refusing to fund the ACA. They're refusing to implement the individual mandate and tax. Let's make sure everyone is clear on why the government is shut down. The GOP doesn't want the individual mandate and tax/fine in place for 1 year.

2 sides to that coin. The Dems need it in place to force people into signing up to generate revenue and show success. The GOP doesn't want people forced into making unwise financial decisions and/or getting stuck paying an additional tax/fine for not being able to afford to sign up.

But that isnt what the people want, its not what they voted for. I see more of a fear that Obamacare will actually work. The republicans are working against the democratic process, they are becoming more and more of a vestigial limb thats on its way to being removed.

How is having healthcare an irresponsible financial decision? It more unwise not to be covered at all! Besides if you are so poor that you cant front the 95$ fine then maybe you should refrain from throwing your thoughts into the public sphere.

Heres the fine for 2014 if you decide not to participate.

$95 per adult, plus $47.50 per child, max $285 or 1% of income

Mingo, either way, Congress was voted in. The Senate and House are voted in people. The House can't pass a bill.. they were voted in! It's what the people want. After all, the House represents the People and the Senate represents the Government.

It isn't irresponsible to have health insurance. But to FORCE someone into buying it whether they can afford it or not is irresponsible. Give people the option. America was founded on people having the option to do what they want and it has been largely successful.

I want to know how you expect the person or people living paycheck to paycheck to be able to afford healthcare? I want to know how this works because I must be balancing my own budget incorrectly.

The person making $10/hour and being asked to pay $300/month is asinine. Especially since the rates JUST came out..

Mingo, this is completely irresponsible to force families into making financial decisions they couldn't possibly plan for. 4 months ago no one knew the cost.. As of the 1st we see the real numbers and people are in sticker shock... but they have to figure out how to afford it by March or else they'll get hit with a fine.

It is a lose lose for the person living paycheck to paycheck.

If the person is making good money without benefits, they're getting screwed. Buying healthcare or paying on their student loan or credit card? What option do they have? Lose-lose.

 

[chunkymonster]

The difference: Mandating it or making it Optional.

Ideas so good, they must be made mandatory!

The smallest majority in the world is the individual.

 

[riser]

I think we have a misunderstanding of what Congress is.

The Senate: Represents the interests of the government, each state has 2 representatives.
The House: Represents the interests of the people; State representatives are allocated based on the population of the State.

The reason the House has more representatives is that they are there to represent the people in their district. The House is where you as an individual are heard. The Senate represents the State and Federal Government interests.

That's why is it so significant that the House is pushing back on the ACA. The Senate is an easy win. It's the House where things really matter.

 

[chunkymonster]

I think we have a misunderstanding of what Congress is.

The Senate: Represents the interests of the government, each state has 2 representatives.
The House: Represents the interests of the people; State representatives are allocated based on the population of the State.

The reason the House has more representatives is that they are there to represent the people in their district. The House is where you as an individual are heard. The Senate represents the State and Federal Government interests.

That's why is it so significant that the House is pushing back on the ACA. The Senate is an easy win. It's the House where things really matter.

That is also why all revenue raising bills originate in the House. So the people have a direct say on what the government spends their tax dollars on.

 

[wanamingo]

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/102685/conservative-defense-obamacare-affordable-care-health

Because the 16th amendment Chunks.

You prove my point for me Mingo...the CONGRESS not the President...shall have the ability...it was President Obama who by-passed Congress to determine that Corporations were not subject to the tax.

Im not sure what your point is Congress passed the ACA ....

If you do not understand that only the Congress can levy taxes and that the President can not pick and choose which segment of the populations pays those taxes, then I can not help you...at all!

I think we have a misunderstanding of what Congress is.

The Senate: Represents the interests of the government, each state has 2 representatives.
The House: Represents the interests of the people; State representatives are allocated based on the population of the State.

The reason the House has more representatives is that they are there to represent the people in their district. The House is where you as an individual are heard. The Senate represents the State and Federal Government interests.

That's why is it so significant that the House is pushing back on the ACA. The Senate is an easy win. It's the House where things really matter.

Its clear to me what the Senate and the House are and do, it also clear to the American people. If congress really represented the people then why do republicans still have a majority? Didnt they lose seats in the last house election by a few million votes? So thats just more weight towards the will of the people.

Also your argument about the poor families that cant afford to pay 95$ + kids really hinges on the fact that the family will NOT use any medical services, and will not take advantage of the healthcare system.

Who pays for emergency services? The taxpayer.
Who is already paying for subsidized health services? The taxpayer.

The person making $10/hour and being asked to pay $300/month is asinine. Especially since the rates JUST came out..

Where did you get this number? I just piped in a single 30 year old adult making 25k a year with 2 kids is looking at far far less than 300$ a month.

The government doesnt force you to get autocare because you dont need a car, you could go your whole life without stepping foot into an automobile. Find me a person that doesnt get sick.

 

[chunkymonster]

All furloughed federal workers are going to get back pay. They need to quit bitching and enjoy their F*****g vacation!!

Once again OMG_73. You are proven correct!

House votes to approve back pay for furloughed workers

I wonder if the Senate and the President care enough about the people to vote, pass, and sign off on this House bill? Or will they continue to claim that the House is holding the people hostage?