Do that to me one more time, once is never enough....

[kbot]

Here we go again folks. Like a bunch of kids in a sandbox. Sad......

Congress misses deadline, sending government into partial shutdown

Congress blew by a midnight deadline to pass a crucial spending bill, triggering the beginning of a partial government shutdown – the first in 17 years.

Lawmakers missed the deadline after being unable to resolve their stand-off over ObamaCare, despite a volley of 11th-hour counterproposals from the House. Each time, Senate Democrats refused to consider any changes to ObamaCare as part of the budget bill.

House Republicans, for their part, refused to back off their demand that the budget bill include some measures to rein in the health care law – a large part of which, the so-called insurance “exchanges,” goes into effect on Tuesday.

As House Republicans continued to debate into the early morning hours, lawmakers spent the final minutes before midnight trying to assign blame to the other side of the aisle. Republicans are no doubt wary of the blowback their party felt during the Clinton-era shutdown, while Democrats were almost eager to pile the blame on the GOP.

“This is an unnecessary blow to America,” Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said.

Ahead of the deadline, the White House budget office ordered agency heads to execute an “orderly shutdown” of their operations due to lack of funds. Americans will begin to feel the effects of a shutdown by Tuesday morning, as national parks close, federal home loan officers scale back their caseload, and hundreds of thousands of federal workers face furlough.

The question now is how long the stand-off will last. Congress is fast-approaching another deadline, in mid-October, to raise the debt limit or face a U.S. government default. Lawmakers presumably want to resolve the status of the government swiftly in order to shift to that debate.

Throughout the day Monday, lawmakers engaged in a day-long bout of legislative hot potato.

The House repeatedly passed different versions of a bill that would fund the government while paring down the federal health care overhaul. Each time, the Senate said no and sent it back.

As a last-ditch effort, House Republicans have floated the possibility of taking their disagreement to what’s known as a conference committee – a bicameral committee where lawmakers from both chambers would meet to resolve the differences between the warring pieces of legislation.

The latest House bill, which the Senate shot down late Monday, 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.

House Republicans are trying once more to pass the counterproposal through the House, and then send that to conference committee. A vote is expected before sunrise.

“It means we're the reasonable, responsible actors trying to keep the process alive as the clock ticks past midnight, despite Washington Democrats refusal - thus far - to negotiate,” a GOP leadership aide said.

Reid, though, said the Senate would not agree to the approach unless and until the House approves a “clean” budget bill.

The rhetoric got more heated as the deadline neared.

“They’ve lost their minds,” Reid said of Republicans, in rejecting the latest proposal.

“Senate Democrats have made it perfectly clear that they’d rather shut down the federal government than accept even the most reasonable changes to ObamaCare,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell countered.

Amid the drama, President Obama said he was holding out hope that Congress would come together "in the 11th hour."

Such a deal did not come to pass.

A prior Republican effort to include a provision defunding ObamaCare in the budget bill failed. House Republicans then voted, early Sunday, to add amendments delaying the health care law by one year and repealing an unpopular medical device tax.

The Senate, in a 54-46 vote, rejected those proposals on Monday afternoon.

At this stage, congressional leaders are hard at work trying to assign blame.

Democrats have already labeled this a "Republican government shutdown." But Republicans on Sunday hammered Reid and his colleagues for not coming back to work immediately after the House passed a bill Sunday morning.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10 ... shut-down/

[Doka]

Here is Another one for ya Kbot

Sense of surreal as Senate makes quick work of House stopgap bill

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) invoked Albert Einstein's definition of insanity as performing the same action repeatedly and expecting a different result. He panned the House-passed legislation for increasing the out-of-pocket healthcare costs of lawmakers and staffers. “This time the House has attached a poison pill that would punish 16,000 congressional staff,” he said.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3256 ... z2gTwHIfln
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook


What???? " poison pill that would punish 16,000 congressional staff,”

Hey, Harry, what about the other 6 billion people, that you want to punish!

[Cherry Kelly]

YA -- Obama gave EMPLOYERS a one year delay - but can't do the same for the PEOPLE??

AND gee Obamacare website 404.... closed down.

YES blame the DEMS (and a few GOP who voted along with the DEMS)...

When 72% or better of the US people don't want this - let alone all the taxes - hmmm.

[kbot]

Here is Another one for ya Kbot

Sense of surreal as Senate makes quick work of House stopgap bill



Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3256 ... z2gTwHIfln
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook


What???? " poison pill that would punish 16,000 congressional staff,”

Hey, Harry, what about the other 6 billion people, that you want to punish!

What makes you think he's concerned about that?????

[kbot]

YA -- Obama gave EMPLOYERS a one year delay - but can't do the same for the PEOPLE??

AND gee Obamacare website 404.... closed down.

YES blame the DEMS (and a few GOP who voted along with the DEMS)...

When 72% or better of the US people don't want this - let alone all the taxes - hmmm.

Just got word that the city's largest physician network's patients are not welcome and will not be received at our competitor across town. They will ALL be referred here for inpatient stays. This may ot go over well with some patients as patients usually have distinct preferences about that sort of thing.

But, this is a condition of Obamacare - Accountable Care Organizations. People may want to check to see how their plan has changed.

[Cherry Kelly]

kbot - and all kinds of calls to local talk radio - from people "pre-existing" conditions who are finding out - nothing FREE or even LOW COST in ACA. In fact of the first six callers - every one of them - higher monthly premiums and higher deductibles. (Had to go pick more tomatoes so did not hear any of the other callers until I came inside.) Last group of callers were relating to people who lost insurance due to downsizing and had their car insurance rates go up. They did not answer calls on air, just had anyone call in if they too had similar. They only gave a total of around 15 callers during that time period (10 minutes) - per their last words before time changed and station switched over to another talk show.

Also heard from neighbor who said that their family doctor is retiring -- his office had been notified they were not on the "approved" doctor's office list. She asked about that when she called to find out who would be taking over. Was told by the receptionist that they would send out a local list of approved clinics as soon as possible.

[kbot]

So CK, what I am getting from Obama and the Democratic Congress is this: Congratulations!!! You all now have healthcare. Unfortunately, due solely to the requirements which we built into the law, and in order for the companies that you work for to stay open, you have either lost your job, or, had your hours reduced so that you cannot afford the lifestyle you had before October 1st. But, know this, we exempted ourselves from this debacle. And, if you are about to retire - aged 60 and above, rest in the knowledge that your income will drop substantially, affecting your social security.

[voguy]

That pretty much sums it up with the exception of them getting on their horse, putting their noses in the air, and proclaiming "make a path, peasants, as we don't desire to be with you. Do as we say, not as we do."

[Riddick]

So CK, what I am getting from Obama and the Democratic Congress is this: Congratulations!!! You all now have healthcare.

Which isn't true at all, but hey, it sounds good doesn't it? And so long as there's enough Americans buying into that line, they'll keep saying it regardless if the facts EVER fall in line with their assertion.

Like I mentioned in VO's thread, even as some folks who couldn't pick up polices before now MAY yet benefit, to whatever extent all the "unintended consequences" adversely affect everyone else's economic situation and severely hampers their ability to pay for coverage even IF they're eligible for subsidies, I really have a tough time believing fewer people will be going without health insurance.

If due to changes at work, large numbers of folks lose the coverage they had, AND see their incomes fall noticeably but not so as to qualify for economic aid, that greatly exacerbates the entire issue... Will this not necessitate greatly extending subsidy eligibilities in sufficient amounts to accommodate all the newly uncovered? Like THAT'S not gonna wind up breaking the bank eventually if not sooner.

Like VO says, when you've got a situation where both expenses and demand outstrip the financial and staffing resources available, the only way to achieve "universal coverage" is by saying sayonara to pretty much anything and everything that made for ready access to quality care. Not to say such care will be non-existent, just that the odds of anyone actually receiving it may well be.

It was cute the way they named the bill the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, but bottom line it's just another one of those things that sounds good but has nothing to do with the new heathcare reality that we'll see coming as a result of it.

[Doka]

Cherry Kelly:

"pre-existing" conditions who are finding out - nothing FREE or even LOW COST in ACA.

The "Pre-existing" thing ran out of money over a year ago. They just forgot to mention that......................

[Riddick]

The "Pre-existing" thing ran out of money over a year ago. They just forgot to mention that......................

Hey, running out of money? That's no problem. That is, it's no problem so long as there's more where that came from eh!

Yet, isn't that the whole issue with the shutdown? I mean, it's a matter of the government needing authority to get their hands ON more money they don't have and aren't going to be in a position to pay back soon if ever, right?

But still, at the same time we can't afford it, by the logic of the proponents of the PPACA we can't afford NOT to have universal healthcare coverage -

Heck, so the "pre-existing" fund fell short already a year ago? A mere trifle of a bookkeeping anomaly, and one that will be taken care of in due course, PROVIDED the GOP stops their CURRENT political gamesmanship and accepts debit limit increases AS a matter of course now and in the future.

Remember folks, the government has responsibilities to keep the business OF government going. And if that means continually kicking the can down the road, then that's what needs be done...

'Course, so much as it's made to be a big deal NOW going through a shutdown, when it comes time the government definitely DOES run out of road for good? That'll REALLY be something to see.

[kbot]

That pretty much sums it up with the exception of them getting on their horse, putting their noses in the air, and proclaiming "make a path, peasants, as we don't desire to be with you. Do as we say, not as we do."

Nice visual.

[kbot]

Which isn't true at all, but hey, it sounds good doesn't it? And so long as there's enough Americans buying into that line, they'll keep saying it regardless if the facts EVER fall in line with their assertion.

Like I mentioned in VO's thread, even as some folks who couldn't pick up polices before now MAY yet benefit, to whatever extent all the "unintended consequences" adversely affect everyone else's economic situation and severely hampers their ability to pay for coverage even IF they're eligible for subsidies, I really have a tough time believing fewer people will be going without health insurance.

If due to changes at work, large numbers of folks lose the coverage they had, AND see their incomes fall noticeably but not so as to qualify for economic aid, that greatly exacerbates the entire issue... Will this not necessitate greatly extending subsidy eligibilities in sufficient amounts to accommodate all the newly uncovered? Like THAT'S not gonna wind up breaking the bank eventually if not sooner.

Like VO says, when you've got a situation where both expenses and demand outstrip the financial and staffing resources available, the only way to achieve "universal coverage" is by saying sayonara to pretty much anything and everything that made for ready access to quality care. Not to say such care will be non-existent, just that the odds of anyone actually receiving it may well be.

It was cute the way they named the bill the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, but bottom line it's just another one of those things that sounds good but has nothing to do with the new heathcare reality that we'll see coming as a result of it.

I think that the overarching goal is nationalization of healthcare... This is just a vehicle to get the country there.

[Cherry Kelly]

so far its interesting - 25% currently are opting out (BREITBART) -- http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... y-That-Way

Whole lot of journalists, etc. can't get signed up.. MOST of the places -- can't even pull up sites to do anything.

DOKA - ya the pre-existing has been gone for a year or more...


---
Discussion last night - ahh only the original pages were ahh declared ok -- as taxes...
SO what about the additional -- 17,400 pages?? Gee they haven't been tested in a court of law. SO - saying its the LAW?? SORRY but ahh not really...

[Riddick]

I think that the overarching goal is nationalization of healthcare... This is just a vehicle to get the country there.

When you say "vehicle", that reminds me of "Government Motors" - Yeah. There's precedent now for the federal government to come in and "take a stake" in areas of commerce of vital importance to the nation, isn't there? "Too big to fail" and alla that?

Thing is, the way they've already got their hands sunk deep into the works with Obamacare, it's doubtful we'll see any LESS of that as a consequence of the “Health Care Bailout of 2018!”