Democrats Support Federal Funding Of Viagra For Sex Offenders...

[Obama 2012 1,714]

After Senate Republicans succeeded in forcing a new House vote on the "fix-it" health care bill, congressional Democrats are now scrambling to finish work on the legislation before leaving town this weekend for Easter recess.

The Senate passed the follow-up health care bill Thursday afternoon, 56-43. But the bill still has to return to the House for final congressional approval, after the Senate parliamentarian determined early Thursday morning that two Republican challenges succeeded in stripping out language in the package.

Altering the bill in any way means it has to return to the House side, which first approved the package of changes Sunday, since both chambers must pass identical versions.

Democrats don't appear worried. Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, said the House could easily approve the expected changes. The House could take it up again later Thursday -- or push it off until Friday.

The package of changes, which is being considered under "reconciliation" rules allowing the Senate to approve it with just 51 votes, is the final piece of the legislative puzzle to the health care reform package signed into law Tuesday. Health care reform is officially enacted, but

The glitches have to do with Pell grants for low-income students.

A senior Senate Republican leadership aide told Fox News that Democrats had tried to improve the cost of the bill while simultaneously piling on Pell grants "without mandating the spending." The aide said Democrats claimed the grants would increase, but were relying on a "future Congress" to find the funding.

"They can't do that," the aide said. "This was one of 100 gimmicks used to keep the score down."

Republicans have been hunting for such violations in hopes of bringing down the legislation. Democrats had also been consulting with the parliamentarian, Alan Frumin, and hoped they had written a measure that would not be vulnerable to such problems.

The two provisions are expected to be formally removed from the bill on Thursday. Both chambers are hoping to begin a spring recess by this weekend.

The president, who signed the landmark legislation into law on Tuesday, was flying to Iowa later in the day for the first of many appearances he will make around the country before the fall congressional elections to sell his health care revamp.

Obama was appearing in Iowa City, where as a presidential candidate in 2007 he touted his ideas for health coverage for all. His trip comes with polls showing people are divided over the new health law, and Democratic lawmakers from competitive districts hoping he can convince more voters by November that it was the right move.

Besides reshaping parts of the landmark health overhaul, the legislation transforms the federal student loan program -- in which private banks distribute the money -- into one in which the government issues the loans directly. That produces some federal savings, which the bill uses in part to increase Pell grants to needy students.

The latest development came as the Senate completed nine hours of uninterrupted voting on 29 GOP amendments to the legislation. Majority Democrats defeated every amendment.

The legislation would change the new health care law by making drug benefits for Medicare recipients more generous by gradually closing a gap in coverage, increasing tax subsidies to help low-income people afford health care, and boosting federal Medicaid payments to states.

It kills part of the new statute uniquely giving Nebraska extra Medicaid funds -- designed to lure support from that state's Sen. Ben Nelson -- that had become a glaring embarrassment to Democrats. It also eases a new tax on expensive health coverage bitterly opposed by unions and many House Democrats, while delaying and increasing a new levy on drug makers.

As they began pushing the bill to passage on Wednesday afternoon, Democrats ran into a mountain of GOP amendments. Outnumbered and all but assured of defeat, Republicans forced votes on amendments aimed at reshaping the measure -- or at least forcing Democrats to take votes that could be used against them in TV ads in the fall campaigns.

"There's no attempt to improve the bill. There's an attempt to destroy this bill," said an exasperated Reid, D-Nev.

"The majority leader may not think we're serious about changing the bill, but we'd like to change the bill, and with a little help from our friends on the other side we could improve the bill significantly," answered Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

By 57-42, Democrats rejected an amendment by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., barring federal purchases of Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs for sex offenders. Coburn said it would save millions, while Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., called it "a crass political stunt."

Democrats also deflected GOP amendments rolling back the health law's Medicare cuts; killing extra Medicaid funds for Tennessee and other state-specific spending; barring tax increases for families earning under $250,000; and requiring the president and other administration officials to purchase health care from exchanges the statute creates.

The landmark legislation that Obama signed Tuesday would provide health care to 32 million uninsured people, and make coverage more affordable to millions of others by expanding the reach of Medicaid and creating new subsidies. Insurance companies would be forbidden to refuse coverage to people with pre-existing illnesses, individuals could buy policies on newly created exchanges and parents could keep children on their family plans until their 26th birthdays.

The $938 billion, 10-year price tag would be financed largely by culling savings from Medicare and imposing new taxes on higher income people and the insurance, pharmaceutical and medical device industries.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/25/senate-return-health-house/

[mawilson 2,133]

Makes sense... if anyone really *needs* Viagra, it's sex offenders.

[Niels Bohr 72]

Guilty by association. Typical of republican behavior.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Guilty by association. Typical of republican behavior.

What are you talking about?

It's pretty cut and dry:

Amendment to stop Viagra from being covered to registered sex offenders: Democrats Vote Against it.

Amendment to make those inside the beltway take part in the new plan: Democrats Vote Against it.

Simple enough to me....

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The Republicans had many years to pass legislation to deny federal funding of Viagra to Sex offenders and haven't done it. They could have put the issue on the table when the health care bill was negotiated and haven't done it. Hell, Coburn can introduce a stand-alone bill to achieve this and would have 90 co-sponsors on such bill in the Senate within the hour. But don't hold your breath, he won't even try. Because this amendment has never been about Viagra for Sex offenders but about making the House take another vote on the measure. It's so blatantly obvious that a blind man could see it in the dark.

[DukeOfYork 28]

Dems voted against the amendments because they make sense. Typical Democrat behavior.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Dems voted against the amendments because they make sense. Typical Democrat behavior.

There was a time to shape the bill and the GOP chose not to particpate past a certain point. They took their marbles and went home but now want to come back with them marbles? Day late, dollar short.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

The Republicans had many years to pass legislation to deny federal funding of Viagra to Sex offenders and haven't done it. They could have put the issue on the table when the health care bill was negotiated and haven't done it. Hell, Coburn can introduce a stand-alone bill to achieve this and would have 90 co-sponsors on such bill in the Senate within the hour. But don't hold your breath, he won't even try. Because this amendment has never been about Viagra for Sex offenders but about making the House take another vote on the measure. It's so blatantly obvious that a blind man could see it in the dark.

You can argue all you want, it still doesn't change how they voted at the end of the day. ESPECIALLY when it's already got to go back to the house anyway off the minor changes.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You can argue all you want, it still doesn't change how they voted at the end of the day. ESPECIALLY when it's already got to go back to the house anyway off the minor changes.

I'm not arguing. I'm merely pointing out some simple facts on the issue. But your argument that they could have adopted the amendment since the measure has to go back to the House anyways is a fail. Why? Well, because when they voted on the amendments, the House version was still intact and there was not an indication at the time that the measure would have to go back to the House. That development occured after the vote was taken.

Again, if this is something the GOP wants done, they can draft a bill and have it fly through the Congress in no time at all. There won't be much opposition to it. We'll see how important this really is to the Republicans. My money is on 'not important at all'.

[DukeOfYork 28]

There was a time to shape the bill and the GOP chose not to particpate past a certain point. They took their marbles and went home but now want to come back with them marbles? Day late, dollar short.

It's hard to participate in a bill drafting process when committee chairmen/women don't even allow proposed amendments to be put to a vote. Hundreds of amendments were offered by Republicans without Dodd/Baucus/Rangel, et al giving them a chance to be voted on in committee (this was last summer).

The fact that the Democrats had to resort to reconciliation trickery just shows how desparate they were to pass a very unpopular bill.

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

of course the dems voted against it, they want bill clinton to have his supply!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It's hard to participate in a bill drafting process when committee chairmen/women don't even allow proposed amendments to be put to a vote. Hundreds of amendments were offered by Republicans without Dodd/Baucus/Rangel, et al giving them a chance to be voted on in committee (this was last summer).

The fact that the Democrats had to resort to reconciliation trickery just shows how desparate they were to pass a very unpopular bill.

Reconciliation isn't trickery, it's how a lot of legislation passes the Senate. The GOP are masters at this procedural tool.

And GOP Senators contradict what you're saying about their ability to shape the legislation. Did you see Senator Grassley's celebratory note on his influence on the health care legislation? Published just yesterday. Fresh off the press, so to speak - I just pulled it off his website.

March 24, 2010

Grassleys Provisions for Tax-exempt Hospital Accountability Included in New Health Care Law

M E M O R A N D U M

To: Reporters and Editors

Re: tax-exempt hospitals provisions in new health care law

Da: Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Sen. Chuck Grassley, ranking member of the Committee on Finance, with jurisdiction over taxes, has worked to hold tax-exempt hospitals accountable for the federal tax benefits they receive. The health care legislation signed into law yesterday includes provisions Grassley co-authored to impose standards for the tax exemption of charitable hospitals for the first time.

...

The provisions enacted in the new health care law are the result of Grassleys leadership on tax-exempt organizations accountability and transparency, including hospitals.

...

In 2009, he drafted legislative reforms and succeeded in persuading the Democratic majority to include several of the reforms in the new health care law.

Sorry, bro.

Edited March 25, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog

[DukeOfYork 28]

Reconciliation isn't trickery, it's how a lot of legislation passes the Senate. The GOP are masters at this procedural tool.

It's a tool used to pass budgets. It's a stretch to consider this legsilation to be "budgetary" in nature, because it isn't. They have already passed a budget this year, but since they didn't need reconciliation (they had more than 60 votes), they used it this time. It can only be used once a year, so at least Cap & Tax won't be passed this way. I digress. They only moved to reconciliation because Scott Brown one a closely followed election and failed to hear what more than 60% of us are screaming at the top of our lungs: Don't pass the health care reform bill!

Both the GOP and Democrats have used it in the past 20 years. In most cases, with more than 60+ votes anyway. But when it's used for non-budget legislation, like the Patriot Act, the opposition tends to cry and whine. Didn't you see the Youtube video where Pelosi, Reid, Biden, Clinton, etc all cried about the Republicans using it? I'm at work now, but I can post it later.

They must have short memories.

[Fandango 1,439]

"The bottom line is that our health care plans are similar," Obama said. "The question once again is, who can get it done? Who can build a movement for change? This is an area where we're going to have to have a 60 percent majority in the Senate and the House in order to actually get a bill to my desk. We're gonna have to have a majority to get a bill to my desk. That is not just a fifty plus one majority."

Senator Obama, campaign trail. Change to Win Convention on Sept. 25, 2007.

[DukeOfYork 28]

Again, short memories...