SO, UH, THERE'S NO MONEY FOR HEALTH CARE?- Senate Panel OKs $128 Billion For Afghanistan, Iraq Wars

[Orwellian_Ghost]

Senate Panel OKs $128 Billion For Afghanistan, Iraq Wars


ANDREW TAYLOR | 09/10/09 05:42 PM | AP


WASHINGTON — With hardly any debate, a powerful Senate committee Thursday approved President Barack Obama's $128 billion request for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for the budget year beginning in October.

The move came as anxiety is increasing on Capitol Hill over the chances for success in Afghanistan and as Obama weighs whether to send more forces to the country.

The war funding was approved as the Appropriations Committee voted unanimously for a $636 billion spending measure funding next year's Pentagon budget. The war funding would implement Obama's order earlier this year to add 21,000 more troops to Afghanistan, which would bring the total number of U.S. forces there to 68,000 by the end of 2009.

There's ample skepticism in Congress that Obama's Iraq and Afghanistan funding request will be sufficient. A key lawmaker, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., predicts that an additional war funding will be needed next spring.

Senate panel chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, would not say whether he believes $128 billion would be enough for military operations in the two countries.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/10/senate-panel-oks-128-bill_n_282726.html

[valerief]

1. Hey, don't touch their drug money. nt

[The Straight Story]

2. Will it take 4 years for that money to be available?

Or is it only 4 years when it comes to health care. Banks didn't have to wait either....

[tbyg52]

6. But, but - those are the *artificial* people

you know, the privileged class.....

[mdmc]

3. USA!

USA!

[TheWatcher]

25. America......

FUCK YEAH!

[Hasnt Happened Yet]

4. We can always find money to kill people..

it's what we do.

[Laelth]

15. Welcome to DU.

:dem:

-Laelth

[polichick]

5. Their values and priorities absolutely SUCK ASS! nt

[flyarm]

7. Joe Wilson and AHIP Team Up to Write Max Baucus’s Health Care Bill By: Jane Hamsher

but don't worry...we can keep killing people in other countries while we have memorials in ours..and then we get to pay for health care for all in Iraq..and Afganistan!



Joe Wilson and AHIP Team Up to Write Max Baucus’s Health Care Bill
By: Jane Hamsher

http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/09/11/joe-wilson-and-ahip-team-up-to-write-max-baucuss-health-care-bill/

Friday September 11, 2009 7:06 am


There really doesn't seem to be any limit to what the administration will do to pass Rahm Emanuel's neoliberal giveaway to the insurance industry. The "author" of the plan released by Baucus (and apparently by Mike Ross) is a former VP of Wellpoint. Now AHIP is boasting about their role in crafting it:

Many of the changes to the insurance system now under discussion are the ones that have been advocated this year by the insurance companies themselves, said Karen M. Ignagni, the chief executive of America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry trade group. "The industry has been the leader in creating the proposals everyone is about to endorse," she said.

No wonder insurance company stocks shot up after the President's speech.

But now we find, per John Aravosis, that Kent Conrad and Max Baucus are changing their bill to appease Joe Wilson:

"We really thought we'd resolved this question of people who are here illegally, but as we reflected on the President's speech last night we wanted to go back and drill down again," said Senator Kent Conrad, one of the Democrats in the talks after a meeting Thursday morning. Baucus later that afternoon said the group would put in a proof of citizenship requirement to participate in the new health exchange — a move likely to inflame the left.

As John says, if Wilson's outburst turns out to be successful, it'll keep happening over and over again. And it will work every time.

If you want to stop this travesty from going forward -- and it's turning into a complete travesty -- ask these members of Congress from strong Democratic districts, all of whom have cosponsored Single Payer in the past and know better, why they aren't pledging to vote against any bill if it turns out to be nothing more than an insurance industry bailout:

read the rest at the link..........

.....................................................................

Reid Endorses Wellpoint’s Co-op Plan
By: Jane Hamsher Friday September 11, 2009 9:46 am

http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/09/11/reid-end...

The Senate Majority Leader endorses the Mike Ross/Kent Conrad/Wellpoint authored co-op plan:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) endorsed the concept of health insurance cooperatives Thursday, siding with centrists in the House and Senate who want healthcare reform but oppose a public option.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also hinted she could accept that approach a day after President Barack Obama delivered an address to a joint session of Congress that offered encouraging words for both centrists and liberal Democrats who have demanded a public insurance option.

I think I may have to adjust my prediction for the co-op "squeeze play" on July 20:

The easiest political path to passing health care is still running the "co-op" crunch. Regardless of what the House does, the Senate can pass Conrad's shitty fake co-op. The Blue Dogs band together and refuse to vote for anything else, and that's what comes out of conference. There's a PR blitz to sell it as a "public plan" (which is why we've worked so assiduously to define it as NOT a public plan), and in a rush to get something passed, Rahm starts twisting progressive arms -- which have been historically very easily twisted.

Blue Dog Mike Ross presciently submitted virtually the same co-op plan in a July 31 amendment that finally emerged this week in Max Baucus's Senate plan. But since it now looks like Pelosi is on board with co-ops, that means the Blue Dogs aren't going to have to take the hit.


HOW MANY WAYS CAN YOU SAY..SELL OUT??????????

[sabrina 1]

13. Unbelievable, and just indefensible.

[flyarm]

19. oh it will be justified , I can think of 10 people who will justify it here..here's more , and worse

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/09/11/maxtax-is-a-plan-to-use-our-taxes-to-reward-wal-mart-for-keeping-its-workers-in-poverty/

MaxTax Is a Plan to Use Our Taxes to Reward Wal-Mart for Keeping Its Workers in Poverty
By: emptywheel Friday September 11, 2009 3:41 pm

I made this point in this post, but I'm going to repeat it over and over and over until it sinks MaxTax, the Baucus health care plan.

MaxTax is a plan that will use your and my tax dollars to reward companies like Wal-Mart for keeping its workers in poverty. Here's why.

In most cases, the MaxTax fines employers up to $400 per employee if it doesn't provide its employees with health care. The fine is absurdly small (less than half of what individuals, themselves, would be fined if they didn't get insurance), but it could mean a company like Wal-Mart would have to pay up to $560 million if it refused to provide insurance to any of its employees.

The other option is to provide crap insurance for your employees. MaxTax gives very few requirements for this insurance (and it allows you to charge employees up to 13% of their income in premiums). But assume Wal-Mart decided to provide incredibly crappy insurance at a cost of $2,500 an employee. It would then pay $3.5 billion a year to meet its obligations under MaxTax.

So Wal-Mart chooses between paying $560 million or $3.5 billion right?

There is another option.

The MaxTax offers this one, giant, out for corporations.

snip: and do read the rest at the linkkkkkkkkkkk!



A $1.25 billion reward to Wal-Mart--a competitive advantage it would have--for paying shit wages.And who will be paying that reward to encourage Wal-Mart to continue to pay shit wages? Why, that'd be our taxes, yours and mine.

[redqueen]

8. *sigh*

it really is enough to make one lose hope

[wroberts189]

9. No town hall debates on this... ? WHY NOT? nt

[Mythbuster]

10. And after we rape and pillage another country

We will spend even more of OUR money rebuilding the country we fought in. And of that "rebuilding" many of the funds will be for healthcare for the people living there and those that we injured. But... Heaven Forbid we spend that kind of money taking care of our own people (including our vets) that would be... just unAmerican.

[bvar22]

11. Democrats not shy about slapping this on the old Credit Card.

No debate about making the WARS "deficit neutral".
FUCKING HYPOCRITES !!!

There is a way to deny them funding.
It isn't for everybody.

[Laelth]

17. Indeed! I want this war to be deficit neutral.

I demand it!

:eyes:

They are massive hypocrites, most of them.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Mythbuster]

20. Deficit Neutral?

Why?? After all this is part of the quest for the elusive Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda and their friends The Taliban! You now... the perfect enemy for the Industrial Military Complex. They have no country, no true cause, a limited amount of followers. They can just "pop up" wherever you want them to be and they can claim responsibility for anything you need them too. I wonder where they'll "pop up" next and how much we'll have to put on our Bank of China debit card for that one.

[NoUsername]

33. Oh c'mon. The whole "deficit neutral" thing only applies to programs

that might possibly benefit the poor and middle class. You know damn well such programs only serve to deplete tax dollars that should be rightly funneled to the top .01% and, as such, are untenable. Goddammit bvar, when are you gonna get with the program?

Ever notice how "entitlements" such as the (admittedly bogus) health care bill tallies the costs for the next 10 years in order to make it look like it's a HUGE expense yet things like Iraq/Afghan/Pakistan war "supplementals" come up every 6 months or so and the Defense budget is on a year-to-year- basis? I remember them pulling this crap with the (totally shitty) Medicare bill they passed back in 2003 or so. They kept touting that it would cost $400 billion. Of course, that was over 10 years, though that fact was conveniently never mentioned on any of the news programs and/or by any of our so-called elected reps. $40 billion. OK, that seems manageable. $400 billion? My gawd! These damn socialist programs are unaffordable!! Never fails. They do it every time for programs that might possibly give a small pittance of money back to the poor and/or working class to make it appear they cost WAY more than they do.

To sum it up, taxpayer money that goes back to programs for the taxpayers is bad. Taxpayer money that is funneled to the top .01% is good. That's just the way it is in this country and nobody (D or R) has the slightest interest in changing that. Once you figure that out, well, maybe you can figure out the rest like bvar has done. (Kudos to you for that, bvar.)

[L0oniX]

12. They haven't got a chance in hell of winning a war over there.

[bobbolink]

14. when, When, WHEN are you going to understand that death is more profitable than health?

The wellbeing of the populace? PPpfpffffftttt!

[Toucano]

16. You can't solve a problem by throwing money at it. Unless that money explodes.

That's seems the be the majority opinion.

[TheWatcher]

18. But The Wars Keep Us Safe.

As for Health Care, can't you just accept whatever crumbs from the table they give you and just wave your pom-poms and cheer for "The Football Team?"

It astonishes me that people just go on and on about The Rule Of Law this, Constitution that, Illegal, Unjust War this, Afghanistan isn't winnable that.

When are you people just going to calm down and sit back and allow yourself to be patient and let the Grand Chess Game play out?

All of you ungrateful ingrates selfishly wanting Freedom, Democracy, and Representative Government. I mean really, who do you think you are?

Can't you just sit back, drink in the Propaganda, wrap yourself in the false paradigm that they allow us to have, and stop asking so many damn QUESTIONS?

Why Do You Hate Freedom?

[TBF]

21. $$$ for killing people, no $$$ for health care. Great priorities. n/t

[malaise]

22. Government run war is good

government run health care is bad. :sarcasm:

[Tangerine LaBamba]

23. But that $128 billion won't kick in

until they meet the deductible.

The deductible is a smile and a very pleasant "thank you" as we hand over the cash.

See how easy?

[OwnedByFerrets]

24. We ALWAYS have money for killing people and

feeding the military industrial complex.

[Octafish]

26. There's always money for war, as long as somebody can make money off war.

Nationalize the military-industrial complex and wars will cease PFQ.

[TK421]

27. Who represents us again? How do they elected again?

won't someone please remind me who these "elected officials" work for again? Please....somebody??? Anybody?..... where is the outrage on this, besides this post?

[Orwellian_Ghost]

28. The outrage is being managed

That's one of the brilliant aspects of the political system we have. All of that rightful anger from the last 8 years was funneled into the party politics that we now see head right back to the financial apparatus that owns the game. Obama in that respect was an act of system legitimizing brilliance in that all of that populist outraged has been quelled. At least for the moment.

[sabrina 1]

31. So true.

'populist outrage has beeb quelled'

[Jkid]

29. There is money for health care

It's just that Congress priorities are fucked up.

[LWolf]

30. .

:grr:

[HCE SuiGeneris]

32. Death and destruction without compromise!

The mantra of those complicit with the GOP/DLC

[lib_wit_it]

34. This will help explain things:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x369101

[timtom]

35. Precisely my point, as well.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6516153&mesg_id=6529679

[AzDar]

36. K ick

:kick:

[Orwellian_Ghost]

37. Bump