Washington (CNN) - Click here throughout the day for the latest updates on where health care legislation stands.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Whip James Clyburn tout their health care reform legislation at a news conference at the U.S. Capitol. (Photo Credit: Getty Images)
Update 3:00 p.m.: Read the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010 and a section by section analysis prepared by Committees on Ways & Means, Energy & Commerce, and Education & Labor.
Update 1:45 p.m.: CNN's Ed Henry asks Robert Gibbs about using the "deem and pass" strategy to pass health care legislation.
12:21 p.m. – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi holds a press conference to tout the new Congressional Budget Office score released Thursday morning:
Republican leaders gather in the Capitol:
Congressional Republican leaders gather for a strategy meeting in the U.S. Capitol Thursday morning. (Photo Credit: Getty Images)
11:14 a.m. – Rep. Paul Broun, R-Georgia, questions the leadership of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi at a press conference with Sen. Tom Coburn and other Republicans:
"I have three simple questions for Ms. Pelosi. Are you so arrogant that you think you know what is best for the American people? Are you so ignorant that you're oblivious to the wishes of the American people? And are you so incompetent that you're going to ignore the constitution of the United States, use tricks deceptions, bald faced lies, to try to ram down the throat of the American people something that they do not want and is going to be absolutely worse for their health care?"
11:03 a.m. – Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma warns House members that switching votes will have consequences:
"I want to send a couple of messages to my friends in the House. If you voted no and you vote yes, and you lose your election and you think your nomination to any federal position isn't going to be held up in the Senate, I've got news for you. Number two is if you get a deal, a parochial deal for you or you district, I've already instructed my staff and the staff of seven other Senators, we will look at every appropriations bill, at every level, at every instance and we will outline it by district and we will associate that with the buying of your vote. So if you think you can cut a deal now and it not come out until after the election, I want to tell you, that isn't going to happen."
9:51 a.m. – House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter, D-New York, explains the process by which the House plans to pass the Senate health care bill:
"Our sense of it – I am prepared to put the Rule on the floor on Sunday...It's not that complicated. It's been used here forever. This notion that this is some brand new, Byzantine thing we brought up out of the cave is nonsense. It's been used every term, I think, certainly since I've been here, over and over again. What we are saying is that the Senate bill will be passed by the House upon the passage of reconciliation. We need to make certain that reconciliation passes because we want to be sure that the Senate bill is changed so that we can get the things out that were so objectionable to the members of the House. And we know what all those are – the Ben Nelson – all the other excessive things that we did not want to have in that bill, that did not do anything for health care."
9:48 a.m.: House Minority Leader John Boehner:
"I'm sorry Mr. President, this isn't about you, it's not about the office you hold, and it's not about the Speaker, this is about the American people and the health care system that they want for our country. We've made clear that it's time to scrap this bill and start over on common sense reforms to make our current health care system better. But no, they're going to continue to ram, ram, ram this bill through the Congress."
"It's pretty clear that the Democrat leaders here in Congress, the president, aren't listening to the American people because the American people are saying stop and they are screaming at the top of their lungs. The president's latest ploy as he's dealing with members trying to convince them to vote against their constituents and to vote with him is to make the point that his presidency is on the line."
9:49 a.m.: House Minority Leader John Boehner:
"I can tell you this, that the Republicans in the House and Senate have worked closely together over the last year and we are going to continue to work closely together and to do everything that we can do to make sure that this bill never, ever, ever passes."
People like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and many others try to sell everything as being about the 'haves not' trying to take from the 'haves', as they try to use scare tactics and emotional appeals aimed at the 'haves' self-interests and egos. Simply put, it is a con. The reality is that the issues are actually all about not continuing to placate and patronize the 'haves greatly', who strongly overtly and covertly back those politicians who support their interests, with the 'haves greatly' now simply putting their arms around the 'haves' and deceptively saying, "we have to protect against the 'haves not' taking from us". The truth is, as history clearly substantiates, the 'haves' are those who always end up paying the most, as only the 'haves greatly' continue to gain. No matter what they say it isn't 'conservative' to neglect responsibilities, allowing everything to deteriorate with only the few always gaining, and it isn't 'liberal' to responsibly address the problems so that everyone really gains; those terms are just being used to excite emotions. Like with the 'trickle down' theory, it is a fraud to advocate that giving more to those who already have greatly stimulates the overall economy as it literally just stays with them but a 'bubble up' theory is valid in that when more is encouraged for the poor ('haves not') and for the middle-class ('haves') it literally quickly gets into and stimulates the economy, including even for the very wealthy ('haves greatly'). We can especially see where the negatives were vividly demonstrated in the Bush-Cheney years, with the full arrogant and stubborn support of the Republican Party, as they concentrated on their private agenda to benefit only the few and gave the majority only apathy, the costs and an abundance of subterfuge. To accept returning to more of the same would be ludicrous.
This time in American politics is reminiscent of "Trudeaumania" in Canada – I was there. :(
Pierre Trudeau, 15th Prime Minister of Canada from the 1960s until the mid-1980s, was a charismatic figure praised for the force of his intellect while at the same time being accused of arrogance, economic mismanagement, and of unduly favoring the authority of the federal government over the provinces.
Trudeau advocated participatory democracy as a means of making Canada a "Just Society." He defended vigorously the newly implemented universal health care and regional development programs as means of making society more just. He also implemented many procedural reforms, to make Parliament and the Liberal caucus meetings run more efficiently, and substantially expanded the size and role of the prime minister's office.
To his credit, he sought to combine and harmonize his theories on social democracy with those of federalism so that both could find effective expression in Canada. He noted the ostensible conflict between socialism, with its usually strong centralist government model, and federalism, which expounded a division and cooperation of power by both federal and provincial levels of government.
But a worsening economy, burgeoning national debt, and growing public antipathy towards Trudeau's perceived arrogance caused his poll numbers to fall rapidly, and he was forced to call an election. He was defeated!
Health Care in Canada remains an inferior system!
To my fellow moderates and liberals:
This morning Rep Broun called Speaker Pelosi names at a press conference. Sen. Coburn threatened to hold up crucial votes if Democrats changed their votes from their previous position.
Please stay above the fray and keep our repsonses civilized. Use the facts you know and please don't stupe to the level of the conservatives that find name calling a debate tactic.
Comon sense and comon good are on our side- let's show it.
Be careful on what you are sold! While there is merit in advocating a complete overhaul of our Senate and House representatives (with a few exceptions), to literally do that without thought or reserve could be just serving others’ hidden agenda. Consider what the result would be of a complete turn over and whose interests that would serve; consider who might gain and be advocating it as just another way for them to win. Right now the Democrats have the majority in both houses and to just flip-flop that would effectively give the majority to the Republicans. I for one don’t want to return to ‘more of the same’ that has cost us so much and that the Republicans all stubbornly and irresponsibly are now seeking to reestablish; effectively trying to continue the catering to the few who strongly overtly and covertly back the politicians who support their interests, while the majority would again be given only apathy, the costs and an abundance of subterfuge. Whatever anyone’s preference it should be sought with clear thinking and not just manipulated by a tactic with a hidden agenda. Possibly the desired rejections could be accomplished in the primaries and thus allowing for consideration of the parties’ positions in the general elections. Just food for thought.
awaitingliberalizationbyCNN : I do take offense to your comment. I happen to work 3 (THREE) jobs right now.
1) Receptionsit for 35 hrs a week – no benefits (no raise for 3 yrs either)
2) Cleaning lady – again no benefits (7 days a week for 2 – 3 hrs a day) AND
3) Assist my grandparents with their 20 acre farm farming on 1 – 2 days a week (this one give me fresh produce and a feeling of well being that I am assisting my grandparents with their dream)
Add to this that I am a single parent of one, I chose to leave the abusive nature of that relationship and teach my child that it was better to be alone than to be beaten.
Even though I live in Oregon (insert comment here) that you would say that I am : (dope smoking people who can't get a job due to drug tests, and/or products of our NEA dominated public education system) is very narrow minded of you.
I have never seen a group of men so emasculated by a woman.The wing-nutts froth at the mouth every time this woman steps into the sunlight.
She is worth having in the democratic party just for all the sleep she keeps the right-wing pansies from having.
Reading all these comments about passing this bill is scary. People you are not going to get covered for another 4 years even if this bill passes. You are going to get taxed though ASAP. If you people need insurance right now your OUT OF LUCK till 4 years down the road. The money you will be paying the government in taxes for NOTHING you can put it against a private insurance policy for yourselves.
Gale Shipman wrote "Hey you people who think that health care insurance keeps people alive: insurance does not keep people alive. People die every day even with the most expensive insurance programs available. Stop trusting your government or insurance company to keep you alive. Only Almighty God can do that."
Sounds like Christian Science to me. It is true that humans are mortal and we all die sooner or later, but later is better than sooner and healthier is better than sickly. So, if your 14 year old daughter gets brain cancer, are you going to pray for healing? Or, are you going to take her to the hospital? And if you have insurance, are you going to file a claim for her chemo and radiation therapy or are you going to pray for money to pay her medical bill? And what if her dad didn't have any money or any insurance?
You liberals are in for a big shock if this thing passes. You won't admit it but it will hurt healthcare like it has never been hurt before. Senior citizens will be the ones to feel the full blunt. you don't care you aren't seniors yet but if you live long enough one day you will be then maybe you will realize what a stupid bill this is.