Gitzo Loc: Indiana

Democrats Act to Stop Vitter Amendment, Keep Obamacare Exemptions for Congress
Tuesday, 17 Sep 2013 07:41 PM
By Jennifer G. Hickey

Democratic leaders increased their efforts on Tuesday to turn aside an amendment sponsored by Republican U.S. Senator David Vitter of Louisiana, that would prevent Congressional members and staffers from receiving exemptions from key Obamacare measures.

When Congress passed the sweeping Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010, Congressional members and their staff were exempted from several provisions of the law.

The Vitter amendment would change that and require the president and vice president to participate in mandated healthcare exchanges and would eliminate federal employer contributions for health benefits for the president, vice president, members of Congress, and political appointees.

The amendment also would block tax credits for assistance in buying insurance on the exchanges for these individuals.

The Office of Personnel Management issued a directive, allowing staff to be eligible for subsidies for the coverage they currently have, which will pay for the majority of their healthcare insurance. Lawmakers were not included.

Democrats who passed the law are firing back at Vitter and his supporters.

Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois took to the Senate floor to defend the exemption, saying that allowing employer contributions for members of Congress and their staffs was simply asking "that this group of individuals be treated the same as every other American with health insurance through their employment."

Durbin, the Senate majority whip, said he fears "that this isn't the end of Sen. Vitter's crusade against health insurance by employers. I think this is the first step."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid joined the attack, saying Vitter's amendment was "hypocritical and mean-spirited."

"Sen. Vitter has happily allowed the federal government to pay for a portion of his health insurance for many, many years," Reid said. "If Republican senators believe they should bear the full cost of their own health insurance, they can, without any change in the law . . . decline the federal government’s employer contribution and pay their own way."

But a new poll released by the Independent Women's Voice gives support to Vitter's efforts.

"Overwhelmingly, 94 percent of voters consider it fair that the Congress be required to abide by the same law they passed for the country. Conversely, 92 percent of voters believe it is unfair that the Congress should be exempt from buying their insurance in the health exchanges," the poll said.

Vitter also took to the Senate floor on Tuesday to argue against the exemption, which he said was "flat-out against the law."

Vitter said his amendment goes to the "fundamental rule of democracy" that "the governors should live by the same rules as the governed – across the board."

The attack by the Democratic leaders follows an ugly battle last week over Vitter's amendment.

Vitter had been holding up action on energy efficiency legislation in order to force Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to bring his amendment on the Obamacare exemptions to the floor.

Senate Democrats drafted a separate amendment to the energy bill, prohibiting lawmakers from receiving employer contributions for health benefits if there was "probable cause" that a member used the services of a prostitute.

The language was a not-so-veiled reference to the scandal involving Vitter in which he confessed to committing a "serious sin." Vitter never admitted to being a client of the "D.C. Madam," Deborah Jeane Palfrey, and he was cleared by the Senate Ethics Committee in 2008 because the incident occurred before his election to the chamber.

Vitter's response to the Democratic amendment came in the form of a request sent to the Senate Ethics Committee last week, alleging that the offices of Reid and Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, violated committee rules "by proposing and circulating through the press legislation that ties members' personal healthcare benefits to their performance of specific acts and votes."

In an appearance on The Laura Ingraham Show on Monday, Vitter admitted he was playing hardball, saying of Reid, "I want to present him with ceremonial brass knuckles this week because that's what he's trying to bring to the Senate floor. That sort of intimidation tactic . . . is absolutely directed at every other member and it is an attempt to quash the rebellion before it starts."

The Vitter amendment on Obamacare has Republican Sens. Mike Enzi of Wyoming, Dean Heller of Nevada, Mike Lee of Utah, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma signed on as co-sponsors.

Democrats aren't the only opponents of the Vitter amendment. Some Republican staffers are "quietly lobbying Democratic aides to ensure the amendment is killed because it would effectively decrease aides' take home pay," Politico reported.

I can't wait to hear all of our resident Democraps tell us why the American public should be forced to have Nobamacare, but members of Congress and their staff should have to put up with it.

Pentony Loc: Earth Traveller

We revolted against the King Of England so that we would not be subject (ruled unfairly) by a European monarch.

So what did we the people do?

We continually vote in politicians who end up being kings and queens who are not subject to the same rules as we the people.

Politicians;
- work less time than we do
- get much, much higher pay than we do for much less work
- have better medical care and dental care than we do
- have better travel expenses than we do
- have better vacations than we do
- have better retirement packages than we do
- live in larger and more opulent houses than we do
- are much less efficient in managing budgets than we are
- drive gas inefficient cars more than we do
- have chauffeured limousine service on a regular basis
- waste tax payer funds
- their children attend private schools which most of us can not afford
- and more

They are kings and queens and we let them be kings and queens.

Solution: Term Limits for all politicians and judges.

How do we enforce Term Limits?

We the people must start a grass routes effort towards enacting an amendment to our U S Constitution.

Think about this! The population of these United States is approximately 316 million. The population of the Congress and other Federal politicians is about 800.

800 divided by 316 million means that less that one percent rules over the rest of us. Is that fair?

No it is not fair especially since those governing, the politicians, enact rules for the governed, we the people, rules which they don't follow or they are not subject to follow.

Solution: TERM LIMITS. It's time for another Constitutional Amendment.

The President has term limits. Why not Term Limits for all politicians and judges?

We the people must start a grass routes effort towards enacting an Amendment to our U S Constitution for all politicians and judges.

QuickShooter101 Loc: East

all I will say is . This country was built many years ago by our forefathers . They built this country to stand as - For The People , By The People ..... Not - For the congress , By The Congress. Are they trying to start another revolution??????

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

One of the key provisions of the ACA is that if you already have insurance through your employer, you are allowed to keep it. This allies to me, all working American with employer provided insurance, and Federal employees, including Congress. In that respect, Congress is already treated the same as everyone else. The Vitter amendment is a political stunt, and no more than a red herring whose only purpose is to distract low-information citizens (aka the Tea Party).

TheeGambler Loc: The green pastures of Northeast Texas

The political elites (as they consider themselves) should abide by the same laws they pass for citizens! No, they should not be exempt from any law!

The "People's Representative" were not supposed to live apart and create a lavish lifestyle for themselves, trading with "insider information" that is illegal for anyone else, accepting graft, accepting pay-offs from lobbyists, taking kickbacks from contracts and giving away taxpayer dollars for favors. Being a politician wasn't mean to be a "career-field," decades long. Politicians live off taxpayers and vote themselves benefits and pay raises, that must be paid by working citizens..

These current criminals should be only "part-time politicians" AND full-time productive Americans! They need to have their own source of income and run their businesses for a profit under the laws they pass! The politicians should live among their constituents where they can be held accountable and pummeled about the head and neck (not literally) when they make stupid decisions for everyone else. instead of be inaccessible in their lavish ivory-towers where they like to hide, far away from the voter, they should be accountable to those they represent.

Politicians should NEVER be allowed to make careers out of being self-serving law-makers! Take away their benefits and make them earn their own living and provide for their own insurance. "Serving the people" should be an honor instead of a "way of life." These politicians are no better than the generationally bloodsuckers that live off the taxpayers. Kick these "elite bloodsuckers" out and make them support themselves. If they are called "TO SERVE" let that be considered a short-term, duty of patriots....the way it was meant to be.

HEART Loc: God's Country - COLORADO

There are 17 physicians in the U.S. Congress; surely one of them could figure out what ails Obama.

What the GOP caucus of doctors had to say in 2012 on repealing Obamacare:

http://doctorscaucus.gingrey.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=302776

TheeGambler Loc: The green pastures of Northeast Texas

This is incorrect, congress is NOT treated like everyone else. And, employers can't afford to pay for obammiecare for their employees. Why do you think employers are demoting everyone to part-time workers. The employees have no say in the matter. "Paying the penalty" for not having healthcare is the solution created by government.
Where did we get this idea that you must "pay government NOT to have something?"

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

Jasbo.......Better check your shoes......you just "stepped in it" again! If you really want to see a "low-information voter", just go look in a mirror ! So now you're attempting to convince us that it's a great idea for members of Congress to vote themselves a fat "raise" every year, hire another dozen or two "staffers", have their OWN "health-care plan", and while they're at it, I'll bet you think the ones who are Democraps should get elected for 20 year terms ?

I think a better "plan" would be for YOU to go clean your "stinky" shoes off and leave the discussion of adult topics to ADULTS.............

hopthecop Loc: salisbury md

congress should be exempt from nothing....what's good for us mortals should be good for them.....

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

You are mixing apples and oranges. My post had nothing to do with Congress hiring staffers, or giving themselves raises, etc.

So I am low information voter? Have you read the statute? I have. all 1000+ pages of it.

Instead of childish insults--prove me wrong. It should be easy. Cite the part of the statute where it compels citizens with health care coverage that they like into the ACA. You will not find it, because it is not there.

But then, you are at a great disadvantage, not having read the law. I guess this makes you the low information voter that is being manipulated for some one else's political agenda. Save your childish insults. I am not the least bit interested.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

In terms of the ACA members of Congress can keep their employer provided health care, like everyone else. As can all civil service employees and the military.

Prove me wrong. Cite the part of the statute that is contrary to what I just said.

Oh, that's right. You have not read the law. I have. Cover to cover. If you want to play with me, then let's stick to the facts. I am not in the least interested in your "fact free" opinions. Prove me wrong. I'll wait.

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

You and I think an awful lot alike, Gambler!

The politicians have jacked their incomes and their perks up to the point where they're starting to see themselves as "movie stars" any more. No one should be in control of how much money they make except for people who own their own businesses.

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

Jazbo sez......;" Have you read the statute? I have. all 1000+ pages of it.

You must have read the "reader's digest" version, Jazbo.......the "official" version is 2,750 pages long; Incidently, I don't think there are very many who are "the least bit interested" in all of that libtard horse excrement you are forever trying to spread around here either, know what I mean?

Then Jazbo rants; "You have not read the law. I have. Cover to cover. If you want to play with me, blah, blah, blah, blah....

Jazbo........Do you seriously think anyone believe's you ? I think you're a liar Jazbo........and I feel pretty safe in saying, I don't think anyone wants to even TALK to you, let alone "play with you".

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Calling someone a liar is a pretty serious allegation. Prove it. Put up pr shut up. Prove me wrong. Cite the statute. You cannot because it is not there. While your at it, cite the part of the law that establishes the "death panels", another right wing lunatic fringe lie. I have already shown more detailed knowledge of he ACA than you are even capable of-because you are either too lazy or too stupid to read the actual law.

Calling me a liar is cheap and easy. Proving it would take some actual work, and analysis. Cite the actual law. But then we are back to lazy and stupid, aren't we?

Also, you're talking to me aren't you?

You have just demonstrated that you have nothing to offer but hot air and cheap insults and completely baseless invective (big word, I know. Look it up). I am not in the least interested in this childishness.

Prove me wrong. Cite the statute. If you cannot, then you will have admitted that you have nothing to offer. Perhaps you should just STFU, before you make a bigger fool of yourself than you already have.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Gitzo: Here is the link to the actual text. This is the last research I will do for you. Read it, then debate me. Until you read it, then we can assume that you have no idea what you are talking about.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr3590