Lovers, Haters, Read the Bill

[Winehole23]

http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf

[spursncowboys]

1990 pages? Seriously? What is the avg reading speed of liberal elitists? Speed readers avg 1000 wpm. So at 1000 w/m, reading for six hours a day, how long would it take?
Good luck to anyone who will do this. Godspeed.

[Winehole23]

1990 pages? Seriously? What is the avg reading speed of liberal elitists? Speed readers avg 1000 wpm. So at 1000 w/m, reading for six hours a day, how long would it take?
Good luck to anyone who will do this. Godspeed.Don't you want to know what your government is getting ready to do to/for you?

[George Gervin's Afro]

1990 pages? Seriously? What is the avg reading speed of liberal elitists? Speed readers avg 1000 wpm. So at 1000 w/m, reading for six hours a day, how long would it take?
Good luck to anyone who will do this. Godspeed.

so you have time to read it..let me guess your just going to parrot what the promininent right wingers tell you?...:rolleyes

[spursncowboys]

Is reading the bill not the job of our elected representatives?
GGA: I don't havetime to read it. The fact that you are ok with a bill with almost 2000 pages goes against your idea of government. I will listen to what Conservatives are against and then I will look it up myself. As opposed to you not reading it and just defending the bill because a conservative is going against parts of it. They make a bill 1900 pages because they know most people can't read that, only insiders. Most Americans don't watch talking heads to know what is going on anyways. I think Repubs and Dems do it.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

yeah. i heard this came out today. voting on it at 3pm i presume.......

[MannyIsGod]

The length of a bill is the newest of the most irrelevant talking points I've ever seen. Members of congress have been failing to read legislation for the longest time and I don't have a problem with it. These guys have staff members who are the real brains in those offices who will do far better and more precise jobs of reading the legislation (not to mention they are largely responsible for crafting it in the first place) and then go on to brief their bosses.

I have no problem with the way this is carried out. I think its telling this has never been brought up as an issue before but is now one of just another political meme.

[Winehole23]

Any thoughts on the bill, since its length is irrelevant?

[Winehole23]

The bill itself was the OP.

[MannyIsGod]

Any thoughts on the bill, since its length is irrelevant?

I'll be more than happy to provide them once I've had a chance to at the least go through parts of the bill and read the reaction of those I trust as well.

[Winehole23]

Cool.

[101A]

The length of a bill is the newest of the most irrelevant talking points I've ever seen. Members of congress have been failing to read legislation for the longest time and I don't have a problem with it. These guys have staff members who are the real brains in those offices who will do far better and more precise jobs of reading the legislation (not to mention they are largely responsible for crafting it in the first place) and then go on to brief their bosses.


This is actually true; that staff members DO read (and in most cases write) the bills; have a friend here in town, an ophthalmologist; took a month of this summer to "work" for a Senator (Coburn). Anyway, he came back mighty enlightened; basically said that the staff members, for all intent a purpose, have a great deal to do with how the country is run. Their writing stuff, interpreting it for the Reps/Senators - doing the negotiating, etc...

All well and good, except for one SERIOUS problem. They're almost all under 30. Actually explains a lot.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Any thoughts on the bill, since its length is irrelevant?


waiting for rush to tell me.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

some questions to throw out there.....were these past bills ever 1000+ pages? what was the amount of time from when it was presented to the time it was voted on?

this "meme" could actually be labeled both ways, but obviously not seen that way to everybody.

[spursncowboys]

so you have time to read it..let me guess your just going to parrot what the promininent right wingers tell you?...:rolleyes

I'll be more than happy to provide them once I've had a chance to at the least go through parts of the bill and read the reaction of those I trust as well.

Hypocrites.

[Winehole23]

GGA and Manny aren't the same poster.

[spursncowboys]

Thanks alot mr. obvious.

[Winehole23]

The lack of attribution suggested you were responding to a single poster. You were not.

[Winehole23]

GGA was arguably right in his surmise (instead of reading the bill or forming your own opinion, you posted Michelle Bachman for support), and Manny was honest about his need to consult the bill and his preferred sources before responding.

How does that make either one of them a hypocrite?

[spursncowboys]

GGA was arguably right in his surmise (instead of reading the bill or forming your own opinion, you posted Michelle Bachman for support), and Manny was honest about his need to consult the bill and his preferred sources before responding.

How does that make either one of them a hypocrite?
What GGA applies to Manny. He didn't make any referrence to liberals doing what he said conservatives would do. Also as far as my opinion. I have a well form idea already. The bill either fits in that, or if not the reasoning should fit in my core beliefs. The main thing I am going to look at when reading this or reading about it is how much? How will it be paid? Are there triggers?
I will do that too. M. Bachman is not a source of my information. It was an article I found interesting. In economics, G. Will, Thomas Sowell, Forbes are opinions I trust. I fact-check.

We cannot afford Medicare and Medicaid and they have been marketing it to be like that. This is a bill created by the most liberal president and House speaker in america's history. I doubt their views of making america's health care will agree with mine.

[MannyIsGod]

What GGA applies to Manny. He didn't make any referrence to liberals doing what he said conservatives would do. Also as far as my opinion. I have a well form idea already. The bill either fits in that, or if not the reasoning should fit in my core beliefs. The main thing I am going to look at when reading this or reading about it is how much? How will it be paid? Are there triggers?
I will do that too. M. Bachman is not a source of my information. It was an article I found interesting. In economics, G. Will, Thomas Sowell, Forbes are opinions I trust. I fact-check.

We cannot afford Medicare and Medicaid and they have been marketing it to be like that. This is a bill created by the most liberal president and House speaker in america's history. I doubt their views of making america's health care will agree with mine.

I need a translation for this.

I do fail to see how I'm a hypocrite here but I fail to understand much of what this guy posts so yeah.

[Winehole23]

What GGA applies to Manny. He didn't make any referrence to liberals doing what he said conservatives would do. GGA is a bulletin board poster, not a journalist. Also, he may not have read Manny's post. GGA only posted the once.

Requiring that posters give balanced treatment to whatever side they're not on verges on the pharasaical. This is an opinion forum, not a formal debate. It's unrealistic -- and not a little amusing -- that you seem to be arguing for a "fairness doctrine" or the equivalent.

Moreover, you yourself do not adhere notably to the scruple you've set forth.

[Winehole23]

Don't get me wrong, SnC: I think being fair to posters not of the same persuasion is a commendable trait and even a desirable one. I wish posters were less jerky to their adversaries around here. For that matter I wish I were less jerky, and believe it or not, I try to be.

It also makes sense to me that GGA's post may have struck you as being personally discourteous. Not that GGA was hypocritical or dishonest, but that he treated you shabbily, seems to be the real basis of your complaint, and it is a valid one.

But calling GGA a hypocrite for it seems overblown to me. Most of his posts stand alone; he doesn't much rely on source materials of any kind, so turned around on him, his prediction about what you would do doesn't really stick to him, IMO.

[Wild Cobra]

Anyone else concerned about section 501 where it states a 2.5% tax for any indivudual not covered for any part of the year?

Wow...

So someone loses their job on Friday, cannot get insurance till Monday...

[ChumpDumper]

Ever hear of COBRA?

[Wild Cobra]

How about section 552, where they are taxing medical equipment.

Aren't they claiming they want to lower costs, or is that my imagination?

[Winehole23]

How about section 552, where they are taxing medical equipment.

Aren't they claiming they want to lower costs, or is that my imagination?The most liberal proponents of health care reform, such as Mr. Weiner of NY, are saying much the same about this bill.

[admiralsnackbar]

1990 pages? Seriously? What is the avg reading speed of liberal elitists? Speed readers avg 1000 wpm. So at 1000 w/m, reading for six hours a day, how long would it take?
Good luck to anyone who will do this. Godspeed.

Have you looked at the bill? We aren't talking single-spaced, no-margin pages. One bill page has -- at best -- as much content as a quarter page in a paperback; the rest is formatting.

[EmptyMan]

Looks good to me. I hope our government is successful in their ultimate goal. The people deserve it.

[PixelPusher]

All well and good, except for one SERIOUS problem. They're almost all under 30. Actually explains a lot.

I doubt there's an age cap for congressional aides. Of course, there's the problem of convincing our older and, uh "wiser" citizens to take the job. What's that haughty phrase I've seen and heard so often? Oh, yeah...

"I couldn't stand the paycut! (harumf, harumf)"