CCongressional Democrats, in an effort to make good on Barack Obama's pledge to provide millions more American children with health care coverage, has some crazy Republicans accusing Democrats of breaking the president-elect's promise - of bipartisanship. The health legislation would provide insurance coverage for an additional 4.1 million children, reducing the number of uninsured in the country by nearly half, according to FamiliesUSA, a nonprofit healthcare consumer group. (Bet they're not bipartisan!)
Currently nearly 7 million children are enrolled in the program. The increased spending for the expanded program will be financed by a 61-cents-a-pack increase in the federal cigarette tax. Taxes on other tobacco products would be increased as well. Republicans argue that consumers should pay the new taxes using a combination of coins depicting each president equally.
The Senate is expected to act quickly on the legislation, which could become one of the first bills Obama signs into law after taking office on Tuesday.
However, Senate Finance Committee Republicans said legislation approved by the committee on Thursday that would expand a popular children's health insurance program violated a spirit of bipartisanship that went into earlier versions of the legislation.
However, Senate Finance Committee Republicans said legislation approved by the committee on Thursday that would expand a popular children's health insurance program violated a spirit of bipartisanship that went into earlier versions of the legislation.
This bears repeating.
Senate Finance Committee Republicans said legislation approved by the committee on Thursday that would expand a popular children's health insurance program violated a spirit of bipartisanship that went into earlier versions of the legislation.
Get it? Republicans from the committee that passed the bill are opposed to the passage of the bill because not enough Republicans voted for it.
Do I need to repeat this? Good.
"That spirit of bipartisan partnership for low-income children appears to be disappearing before our very eyes. It's being replaced with partisan exploitation" said Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, the top Republican on the usually collegial Finance Committee.
He called it "damn disgusting." He noted that children have lived without health insurance since the dawn of time and the bill - though back by other Republicans - did not fit the sniff test for bipartisanship. "Bipartisanship means that I agree with the bill, too," grumbled Grassley, whose name seems appropriate for his district.
Grassley said many Republicans (including he) will not be able to support the current children's health bill and that the way the Democratic majority handled the current bill "does not bode well" for how they will act on other major issues such as the broad health care reform promised by Obama. "Bottom line: if I don't sign off on it, it's not bipartisan. If it's not bipartisan, then it's a broken campaign promise. If it's a broken campaign promise, then we have grounds for Obama's impeachment. Period."
Republicans also opposed an amendment that would drop a five-year ban on providing the children's health benefit to legal immigrants, which Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas called a "poison pill" that injects immigration, a divisive issue for Republicans, into the children's health debate. "Imagine the message this will send to illegal immigrants!"
"We've been thrown underneath the bus," Roberts said. "Thrown in front of a train. Hung out to dry. Ignored. I want my mommy."
The immigration provision brings the Senate bill more in line with a bill approved on Wednesday by the U.S. House of Representatives on a vote of 289-139. Forty Republicans joined majority Democrats in passing the bill.
But that's just not bipartisan enough for some folks.
He called it "damn disgusting." He noted that children have lived without health insurance since the dawn of time and the bill - though back by other Republicans - did not fit the sniff test for bipartisanship. "Bipartisanship means that I agree with the bill, too," grumbled Grassley, whose name seems appropriate for his district.
Grassley said many Republicans (including he) will not be able to support the current children's health bill and that the way the Democratic majority handled the current bill "does not bode well" for how they will act on other major issues such as the broad health care reform promised by Obama. "Bottom line: if I don't sign off on it, it's not bipartisan. If it's not bipartisan, then it's a broken campaign promise. If it's a broken campaign promise, then we have grounds for Obama's impeachment. Period."
Republicans also opposed an amendment that would drop a five-year ban on providing the children's health benefit to legal immigrants, which Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas called a "poison pill" that injects immigration, a divisive issue for Republicans, into the children's health debate. "Imagine the message this will send to illegal immigrants!"
"We've been thrown underneath the bus," Roberts said. "Thrown in front of a train. Hung out to dry. Ignored. I want my mommy."The immigration provision brings the Senate bill more in line with a bill approved on Wednesday by the U.S. House of Representatives on a vote of 289-139. Forty Republicans joined majority Democrats in passing the bill.
But that's just not bipartisan enough for some folks.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid spokesman Jim Manley called the Republican charge that Democrats were playing politics with the children's health bill "ridiculous." He pointed to the number of Republicans voting for the House bill and said there was no reason the Senate version could not enjoy Republican support.
"They're just acting like big babies so they can qualify for the benefits of this new plan," said Reid.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment