Kudo's to Anthony Weiner...

[R13]

YouTube - ‪Anthony Weiner Rips Apart Republicans on 9/11Health Bill‬‎

For ripping the GOP a new one. As usual, a common sense bill that a normal person would support and vote for, is fought by the GOP. Talking about the bill for the 9/11 responders.

Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-New York) ripped into the GOP July 29 over a bill that would have provided free health care to rescue workers who became ill as a result of the 9/11 World Trade Center collapse.

The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act would have provided more than $7 billion in aid to those rescue workers. However, the Democrats used a procedure that suspended the rules before considering the bill,
but required a 2/3 majority to pass it, as opposed to a simple majority. The maneuver was meant to prevent Republicans from loading the bill with any partisan amendments of their own, which was likely given the popularity of the bill.

Most Republicans were against the bill, with Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas calling it a "slush fund." Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois didn't like that the fund would pay at a higher rate than medicare, and stated, "what this is is enfranchising a bunch of New York City Hospitals."

When it appeared likely that Republicans were going to vote against the bill, in part due to taking offense at the procedure used to pass it, Rep. Weiner took to the stand and admonished Republicans for doing so.

"It's Republicans wrapping their arms around Republicans, rather than doing the right thing on behalf of the heroes," Weiner shouted into the microphone. "It is a shame... a shame... if you believe this is a bad idea to provide health care, then vote no! But don't give me the cowardly view of, oh, if it was a different procedure..."

The bill fell over 20 votes shy of the number needed in order to pass.

On July 30, Weiner appeared on Fox News and showed no regrets over his statements, stating,"You know, this is not something that got rushed through, this is nine years in the making. This is doing the right thing, and we should have passed this bill overwhelmingly without any controversy at all. But unfortunately, the party of 'no' hit a new low last night."


Rep Anthony Weiner Rips Republicans Over Health Care, but It's Not the First Time - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com
________________________

The dems shouldn't have went with the dumbass 2/3 majority to prevent them from adding amendments, but how they could oppose this is beyond me. Stewart busted them for it tonight, also got the dems for the procedure part, but kudos to this guy for standing up to the idiots.

[TheBeast]

The bill has enough votes to pass, it's not just reps not all the dems are for for this bill either. They have 265 votes to pass the bill easily. Weiner and the other dems are just trying to get more votes from the reps so when people finally find out what all is in this bill they can say well even the republicans voted for this stuff and supported it and with the 2/3's rule it won't be able to be amended to take out the controversial aspects.

Hannity and Peter King own Weiner, you can fast forward to the 7 min mark if you don't want to listen to the full discussion. I really like how Weiner says he will only do his JOB and read a bill before he votes on it if Hannity agrees to read all of them as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMjOeMl1cPs

[R13]

There wasn't enough dems to pass it on it's own. I may be wrong, but I don't think any dem voted against it, it was 243 dems and 12 reps, the rest of the reps voted against it. The people know what's in the bill, it had been openly discussed and the two things that the reps. found "wrong" with it...that there was a small tax on offshore accounts or something(which actually was just closing a tax loophole), then that there "may have been illegals who were at ground zero, that would qualify for compensation". Yeah, things that ridiculously stupid. Those the controversial aspects you were talking about? Because if not, I'd love for you to show me. This is just them being dicks, just plain and simple and now our heroes, have to suffer because of it.

[Counts]

Playing devels avacult here Why would the Gov singel out these rescue workers from any others throughout the US that develop health problems due to there job?

[R13]

These workers aren't just suffering from regular, everyday hazards of the job. It's just like soldiers benefits IMO. The regular coverage they had as just firefighters or whatever, doesn't cover most of what they suffer from. There were plenty that weren't on the clock, but rushed in anyway, but are denied compensation because they weren't on the job. This bill is about as common sense as it gets.

[Counts]

These workers aren't just suffering from regular, everyday hazards of the job. It's just like soldiers benefits IMO. The regular coverage they had as just firefighters or whatever, doesn't cover most of what they suffer from. There were plenty that weren't on the clock, but rushed in anyway, but are denied compensation because they weren't on the job. This bill is about as common sense as it gets.

Sounds good but what about Vol fire fighters that are injured in the line of duty or the off duty Police officer that rushes in to help in a crash but is injured off the clock......why is one situation more fund worthy than the other?

[TheBeast]

They only need 218, if you believe for a second there isn't some alterior motive for wanting all these extra votes then you more than show all you care about is blindly following whatever the dems tell you. Where was all this uproar and needing all this rep support and votes when they barely squeaked through that healthcare debacle with 219 and didn't have full dem support like they do know.

Don't bother to repost I know you'll come up with some bullchit justification.

[R13]

And as I've said, this isn't a normal hazards of duty issue. And those would be isolated incidents over the country, this was a federal issue and effected many, many people. Obviously, Congress can't individually have a vote and allocate funding for scattered incidents across the country. The health effects of the dust and conditions aren't normal as a house fire, along with other effects that this has caused to those that responded and worked at ground zero.

[R13]

They only need 218, if you believe for a second there isn't some alterior motive for wanting all these extra votes then you more than show all you care about is blindly following whatever the dems tell you. Where was all this uproar and needing all this rep support and votes when they barely squeaked through that healthcare debacle with 219 and didn't have full dem support like they do know.

Don't bother to repost I know you'll come up with some bullchit justification.

They went with the 2/3rds majority that needed 265, if they had went with the normal 218, the GOP could drag this out for months with adding amendments to it. I've already said it was a dumb move and should have just went with the regular procedure. They were expecting more GOP support, that was part of what Weiner was talking about.

I'm still waiting for you to show me what these parts in the bill that were so controversial....

[Counts]

And as I've said, this isn't a normal hazards of duty issue. And those would be isolated incidents over the country, this was a federal issue and effected many, many people. Obviously, Congress can't individually have a vote and allocate funding for scattered incidents across the country. The health effects of the dust and conditions aren't normal as a house fire, along with other effects that this has caused to those that responded and worked at ground zero.

No they can't go ona a case by case bases buy is it not unfair to treat this situation differant from others with simular situations on a smaller scale?

Why not pass a blanket coverage that would apply to everyone and not just a few (equle protection anyone)