Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SENATE COVERAGE -- (September / October '04)
http://www.senate.gov/ ^ | 9-7-04 | CONGRESS

Posted on 09/07/2004 4:13:07 AM PDT by OXENinFLA

Since "Free Republic is an online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America.", I and others think it's a good idea to centralize what the goes on in the Senate (or House).

So if you see something happening on the Senate/House floor and you don't want to start a new thread to ask if anyone else just heard what you heard, you can leave a short note on who said what and about what and I'll try and find it the next day in THE RECORD. Or if you see a thread that pertains to the Senate, House, or pretty much any GOV'T agency please link your thread here.

If you have any suggestions for this thread please feel free to let me know.


Here's a few helpful links.

C-SPAN what a great thing. Where you can watch or listen live to most Government happenings.

C-SPAN 1 carries the HOUSE.

C-SPAN 2 carries the SENATE.

C-SPAN 3 (most places web only) carries a variety of committee meetings live or other past programming.

OR FEDNET has online feed also.

A great thing about our Government is they make it really easy for the public to research what the Politicians are doing and saying (on the floor anyway).

THOMAS where you can see a RECORD of what Congress is doing each day. You can also search/read a verbatim text of what each Congressmen/women or Senator has said on the floor or submitted 'for the record.' [This is where the real juicy stuff can be found.]

Also found at Thomas are Monthly Calendars for the Majority and Minority

Roll Call Votes can be found here.


OTHER LINKS


THE WHITE HOUSE

THE WAR DEPARTMENT (aka The Dept. of Defense)

LIVE DoD Briefings

NEWSEUM: TODAY'S FRONT PAGES

TALON NEWS


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: senate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 221-222 next last
To: Mo1; Howlin; Peach; BeforeISleep; kimmie7; 4integrity; BigSkyFreeper; RandallFlagg; ...
Senate Floor Schedule for Tuesday, Sept. 14, 2004

9:45 a.m.: Convene and begin a period of morning business.

Thereafter: Resume consideration of H.R. 4567, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2005.


C-span3 10:00 am LIVE Senate Committee CIA Director Nomination Select Intelligence Porter Goss , R-FL

This will be fun to watch.


Votes:
173: Motion to Table the Schumer amendment #3615: , as further modified
Tabled, 55-34

174: Motion to Waive the Budget Act with respect to the Lautenberg amendment #3617:
Not Waived, 38-50



81 posted on 09/14/2004 5:08:56 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
Can you say invitation for VOTER FRAUD?

Well that migh account for the 8 million voters they're claiming live over seas ... rolling eyes

82 posted on 09/14/2004 5:16:44 AM PDT by Mo1 (Why is the MSM calling the Vietnam Vets and POW's a suspected group??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

Rockefekker up ripping into the CIA....................sickneing.


83 posted on 09/14/2004 7:12:07 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

Missed it .. Tommy Dashole is ranting now

What was he ripping the CIA about?


84 posted on 09/14/2004 7:17:22 AM PDT by Mo1 (Why is the MSM calling the Vietnam Vets and POW's a suspected group??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Oh, I got C-span3 on Goss's hearing.


Graham just gave Goss a ringing ENDORSMENT, Looks like Nelson will be doing the same....
85 posted on 09/14/2004 7:24:22 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
Hey Durbin .. Why are you giving a Kerry Stump Speech on the Senate Floor

It's not a campaign rally you are at

86 posted on 09/14/2004 7:26:24 AM PDT by Mo1 (Why is the MSM calling the Vietnam Vets and POW's a suspected group??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
What was he ripping the CIA about?

SOSDD-- About how bad it's intelligence was, how it needs to be revamped, said the new head of the CIA needs to be non-partisain, said Goss IS partisain, Rockerfeller said he'd get into it more when he questions Goss. That was all during his opening statement.

Goss up now..............

87 posted on 09/14/2004 7:27:38 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

Uncle Teddy is up speaking now


88 posted on 09/14/2004 7:29:19 AM PDT by Mo1 (Why is the MSM calling the Vietnam Vets and POW's a suspected group??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Another Kerry commercial?
89 posted on 09/14/2004 7:30:18 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Aren't I the lucky one? Tuning in C-span2 jsut in time to see Teddy trying to turn around Bush's joke about Senators from Mass, into praise of himself. His sarcastic humor is so over! He's a throwback to bygone days.

Won't it be sweet when Daschle is thrown out of the senate? Thune is ahead in the polls, this just might happen. Oh happy day!!!

90 posted on 09/14/2004 7:35:04 AM PDT by YaYa123 (@ Teddy Kennedy Occasionally Raises His Voice. I think he wants to wake the old boys up.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

There goes Teddy screaming .. Good Grief

He's going on about Healthcare .. Kerry's plan is good .. Republicans are against medicare



BTW ... Sounds like Kerry's plan is just like Hellary's



http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st269/



Executive Summary
Senator John Kerry has proposed a plan to radically reform the U.S. health care system. If he is successful, millions of middle-income families will be enrolled in Medicaid, the federal-state health program for the poor. Millions more will get their insurance through a system of managed competition modeled after the federal employee’s health system and similar to what Hillary Clinton proposed more than a decade ago. Most people would be forced from the private health plans they have today.

The ostensible purpose of Kerry’s proposal is to insure the uninsured. By some estimates as many as 44 million people lack health insurance at any one time. Sen. Kerry’s goal is to insure about two-thirds of them. The effort will be expensive, even by Kerry’s own estimate. We put the price of these reforms in excess of $1 trillion over ten years — an amount equal to almost $1,000 per year for every household in America.

Unlike the Clinton plan, Kerry’s program would not mandate employer-provided health insurance coverage. Instead, it would use economic incentives to induce people to voluntarily insure. But very little of those incentives will actually go to individuals. About 90 percent of the funds will go to state governments, employers and insurance companies. In a nutshell, the Kerry plan would use taxpayer dollars to encourage public and private institutions to persuade individuals to obtain insurance. Among the inducements:

The federal government would pick up the additional cost of insuring Medicaid children if the states expand eligibility and increase enrollment.
The federal government would pay the bulk of catastrophic health expenses if employers offer insurance to all employees and pay at least one-half of the cost.
Additional subsidies would be offered to low-income people who insure through the managed competition system: small business employees, the unemployed, and people aged 55 to 64 years.
And insurance costs would be limited to a percent of family income for everyone else who individually enrolls in the managed competition system.
President Bush has proposed tax relief for people who buy insurance on their own. In stark contrast, Kerry’s tax subsidies are trickle-down — people are supposed to get derivative benefits from checks written to others. Will this approach work?

More than half of the money in Kerry’s plan will be spent expanding Medicaid (for low-income families) and the SCHIP program (for low-income children). Prof. Kenneth Thorpe, Kerry’s health adviser, estimates that as many as 26 million new people will be enrolled. However, as the public sector expands the private sector will surely contract:

Even Kerry assumes that for every 10 people who sign up, three people will lose employer-provided private insurance; and it could be much worse.
Studies in the 1990s found that every additional dollar spent on Medicaid led to a reduction in spending for private insurance of 50 to 75 cents.
More recent evidence suggests that private sector crowd-out is approaching one-to-one: Each new Medicaid enrollee is offset by one less person with private insurance.
Moreover, most of the private sector subsidies will go to people who are already insured; and employers will receive subsidies even if they fail to insure a single additional employee. Bottom line: It is entirely possible to spend $1 trillion and achieve no reduction in the uninsured.

Quality of care will suffer under the Kerry proposal. People who go from employer plans to Medicaid will have fewer choices of doctors, longer waits for care and some health care rationing. Those who join the system of managed competition will experience a different problem: Health plans will face perverse incentives to over-provide to the healthy and under-provide to the sick.

On the surface, managed competition sounds attractive. Each year, people could choose among competing health care plans — much like federal employees currently do. But the community-rated premiums charged bear no relation to actual health care costs. Healthy enrollees would overpay. Enrollees with high health costs would underpay. Thus health plans would have strong incentives to provide more services to profitable, healthy enrollees (in order to attract more of them) and fewer services to unprofitable, sick enrollees (in order to attract fewer of them).

Kerry explicitly rejects national health insurance, and wisely so. We have seen political pressures in other countries cause politicians to skimp on expensive, lifesaving technology even as they over-provide relatively trivial services to healthier people. And though Kerry avoids the political pressures of national health insurance, the end result may be the same because of the economic pressures of managed competition.

The plan will almost certainly lead to a new round of health care inflation. Federal spending alone will increase by more than $100 billion a year. But since there will be no increase in supply, the bulk of this new spending will buy higher prices rather than more health care. To make things worse, individuals will face perverse incentives to over-insure and over-consume.

For example, faced with virtually no out-of-pocket costs, the 26 million new enrollees in Medicaid will find no reason to show spending restraint. The bills all go to someone else. Premium caps mean that a poverty level individual will pay no more than $600 or $700 a year, with the excess premium subsidized by Uncle Sam. Given a decision to insure, the incentive will be to pick the most expensive plan available.

In an effort to hold down costs, Kerry’s advisers tout the benefits of “case management.” But in his acceptance speech at the Democratic convention, Kerry rejected all forms of managed care. He appears to have taken no position yet on Health Savings Accounts and other forms of consumer-directed health care.

Kerry’s original cost estimate was close to $900 billion over 10 years. Subsequently, he seems to have endorsed close to $300 billion dollars in savings, mainly by eliminating waste and inefficiency. Reading between the lines, it is tempting to conclude that Kerry really wants his plan to be paid for by the taxes he has promised to impose on taxpayers who earn more than $200,000 a year.

Beginning with the first full year of operation and ignoring phantom savings, we put the 10-year cost in excess of $1 trillion. But rescinding the Bush tax cuts for the “rich” will provide only one-third of that amount. For Kerry’s plan to succeed, new taxes for the middle class appear to be inevitable.

The Kerry plan would harm the economy. It would raise taxes on capital and lower workers’ take home pay. And because virtually all of Kerry’s subsidies are phased out as income rises, the plan would create new penalties for work. For example:

The premium cap alone would add 15 percentage points to the marginal tax rates of low-income families — for every extra dollar they earn, they would lose 15 cents of premium subsidy.
Assuming (as Kerry does) that employees reap the full benefits of employer subsidies and bear the full cost of their withdrawals, the small business tax subsidy would add 11 percentage points to the marginal tax rates of low-income workers, if they choose an average cost health plan.
If they choose a high cost plan (because so little of the premium will come out of their own pockets), their marginal tax rate could climb 19 percentage points.
When these penalties are added to other marginal tax rates created by the income tax, the payroll tax and the withdrawal of other subsidies such as the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), overall tax rates for low-income families would soar to levels normally thought to apply only to the very wealthy.

A major problem with the current system is that tax subsidies for health insurance are arbitrary and unfair. But rather than move to a fairer system that treats equals equally, Kerry would create a slew of new subsidies that would make the current system even more arbitrary. Under the Kerry plan, people at the same income level would receive vastly different subsidies depending on their age, where they work and how they obtain insurance.

By design, the Kerry plan does not insure everyone. So who would be left out? The people most ignored are mainly middle-income families with incomes above 300 percent of the poverty level who buy their own insurance. Over the past decade, almost all the increase in the uninsured is accounted for by this group. Further, unlike people who get tax-subsidized insurance through an employer, these families must buy insurance with after-tax dollars. President Bush has proposed a tax deduction for this group, if they purchase insurance combined with health savings accounts. Kerry offers these families virtually no relief.

The structure of the Kerry health plans raises a number of intriguing questions:

Why spend several hundred billion dollars on catastrophic insurance for millions of people (many with high incomes) who are already insured, while ignoring all of the non-poor uninsured who currently get no tax relief?
Why spend billions to subsidize small businesses if they join an insurance system that doesn’t yet exist, while denying them those same subsidies if they buy insurance that is readily available in the marketplace?
Similarly, why pay the cost of premium caps and other subsidies if individuals buy insurance that doesn’t yet exist, while denying them any relief if they buy insurance that is already available?
And why spend billions enrolling middle-income families in Medicaid instead of using those same dollars to help them enroll in employer plans and individually-owned policies which they would probably much prefer?
There is only one explanation that sensibly answers all of these questions. The real purpose of this plan is not to insure the uninsured. The real purpose is to radically change our health care system.


91 posted on 09/14/2004 7:36:40 AM PDT by Mo1 (Why is the MSM calling the Vietnam Vets and POW's a suspected group??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
"hello?" Hello?

Teddy just discovered that old exclamatory insult. How tacky!

92 posted on 09/14/2004 7:38:25 AM PDT by YaYa123 (@ Teddy Kennedy Occasionally Raises His Voice. I think he wants to wake the old boys up.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Got him on....good greif!
Representative Hayworth of AZ on House Floor: "What did Dan Rather know and when did he know it?"
93 posted on 09/14/2004 7:38:45 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

It sure would be sweet

You know .. I'm not a doctor, but if Uncle Teddy doesn't stop screaming like that, he's gonna give himself a stroke


94 posted on 09/14/2004 7:38:54 AM PDT by Mo1 (Why is the MSM calling the Vietnam Vets and POW's a suspected group??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

LOL .. thanks .. I needed that laugh


95 posted on 09/14/2004 7:43:05 AM PDT by Mo1 (Why is the MSM calling the Vietnam Vets and POW's a suspected group??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

Rockerfeller up on C3


96 posted on 09/14/2004 7:48:23 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

tagline change


97 posted on 09/14/2004 7:50:03 AM PDT by OXENinFLA (W-"We stand for the Second Amendment which gives every American the individual right to bear arms.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

Just switched over

Gee .. sounds like he is blaming the Republicans were underfunding the CIA

And now he brings up a Bill that Kerry introduced

UNBLEEPINGBELIEVABLE ... I can't believe he is doing this at THIS hearing


98 posted on 09/14/2004 7:52:54 AM PDT by Mo1 (Why is the MSM calling the Vietnam Vets and POW's a suspected group??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
Correct me if I am wrong .. but isn't this suppose to be a nomination hearing for a new CIA Director and not a damn campaign stump speech for John Kerry
99 posted on 09/14/2004 7:56:21 AM PDT by Mo1 (Why is the MSM calling the Vietnam Vets and POW's a suspected group??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

Boy that sure was a GREAT chart..........................


100 posted on 09/14/2004 7:58:17 AM PDT by OXENinFLA (W-"We stand for the Second Amendment which gives every American the individual right to bear arms.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 221-222 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson