Quantcast

Comments about ‘House passes bill requiring Obama administration to report health care numbers’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Jan. 16 2014 1:44 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Mountanman
Hayden, ID

There is only one reason it is "secret" and that is because its very, very bad news for Democrats!

Mark B
Eureka, CA

How much are the Republicans willing to spend in order to have all this data compiled?

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

Maybe I reblicans want to win in November they should focus on actuall doing something useful.

@mountanman
The numbers are released monthly and are hardly a secret.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

@ Mark. American tax payers have already wasted about 2 billion on the disastrous Obamacare launch. Next up, insurance company bailouts because too few young people will agree to pay for healthcare they will not receive. How's that for a very expensive mess?

David
Centerville, UT

Will it be difficult to report those numbers on a weekly basis? I would be shocked if the Obama administration doesn't already get a weekly report from HHS.

But I am also confident that Obama will thumb his nose at congress and refuse to comply with the request/demand. His arrogance and political enmity towards Republicans will keep that from happening.

SCfan
clearfield, UT

spring steet

The most useful thing Republicans can do for the country is to beat Democrats in November.

Riverton Cougar
Riverton, UT

Silly Congress, didn't you know that Obama is the one who writes the laws?

Oh wait....

The constitution says that it is the House and Senate who make the laws, not the President. Maybe I should write a letter to Obama to let him know.

FT
salt lake city, UT

Seems like a reasonable request. BO is going to be in office for 3 more years and the ACA will as well.

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

@SC fan

they my want to spend more time actually doing their jobs and less time playing silly political games then.

ute alumni
SLC, UT

and you'd believe barry and his buddies with the numbers? the same guy that has a pen and a phone and is so honest that we have NO answers for fast and furious, IRS, AP, Benghazi, ACA?

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"is so honest that we have NO answers for fast and furious, IRS, AP, Benghazi, ACA?"

or is it "we have NO answers that we like"

ute alumni
SLC, UT

Blow
What are the answers that I don't like?........chirp

Thid Barker
Victor, ID

@ JoeBlow. If you are looking for honesty from Obama, you will never get it! Obama got 3 Pinocchio's from Fact Check just yesterday because he is dishonestly counting people who were previously enrolled in Medicaid but now re-signed up for Medicaid as "new enrollees" on Obamacare! In other words, he is dishonestly reporting even the very meager number of people who are enrolling in his healthcare mess! His claim of 2 million (or 6 million depending on the day) new enrollees turns out to be less than 380,000 actual new enrollees! His pants are on fire!

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"What are the answers that I don't like?........chirp"

The answers that came out of all the various investigations.

Benghazi - Pickering and Mullens did an extensive investigation. Certainly their report had answers. Your claim? - No answers

Benghazi - Senate Intelligence Committee released a report This Week. No answers you claim?

Fast and Furious? Are you suggesting that there have been no investigations?

Are you suggesting that the GOP controlled house has not investigated all of these?

Of course there are answers.

LoveLife
Riverton, UT

Mark B: For a website that cost $2 billion, it shouldn't cost anything to have this data compiled. It should be ready with the click of a button to create a report.

Joe Blow:

Maybe you can answer these questions:

Where was President Obama during the Benghazi attack and what was he doing?

Sec. Defense Panetta and General Dempsey testified they didn't speak with him after they were initially informed of the attacks, yet those attacks continued on for six hours.

This was an act of war against the United States and we don't even know what the CoC was doing. There is no record of him talking with anyone or issuing any commands.

If a doctor is negligent in the death of a patient, there will be, for starters, lawsuits to hold the doctor responsible. Obama is negligent in the death of these Americans-especially the last two who were killed hours later after no help was sent. He neglected his CoC responsibilities.

Why isn't Obama being held responsible? Seriously, it's okay with you that he ignored an attack on an American consulate but attended the fundraiser he had the next day?

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"Where was President Obama during the Benghazi attack and what was he doing?"

And why does this matter? Maybe he was in the bedroom. Or the bathroom. What would have changed? What scenario as to where he was changes anything?

"Obama is negligent in the death of these Americans-especially the last two who were killed hours later after no help was sent. He neglected his CoC responsibilities."

How was he negligent? What could he have done? Are you suggesting that somehow troops could have saved their lives after the attack started?

"Why isn't Obama being held responsible?"

Responsible for what? The attacks? Not having the embassy better protected? Not sending in troops or the navy seals?

Embassy attacks have happened throughout history. Lots during Bush's leadership. You guys go through quite the cherry picking exercise to insure that somehow this is different and that somehow Obama is responsible.

How many attacks occurred on Embassys in the 8 years prior to Obama being elected? Who was held responsible for those.

I just want consistency

LoveLife
Riverton, UT

Why does it matter where he was? Seriously? Why bother having a Coc? If your child was in the military, or serving in an embassy somewhere in the world, would you want President Obama as the Commander-in Chief?

You want a man who goes to bed when Americans are being attacked and he continues to sleep as the fighting continues instead of getting up, calling his cabinet, and going to the Situation Room?

Do you know the definition of criminal negligence? "Recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury or death (or failing to do something with the same consequences)."

Yes, there have always been embassy attacks. Do you have a specific example of an attack resulting in an ambassador's death in a very dangerous area, where there wasn't enough security, additional security requests were ignored, or that investigations showed it could have been prevented by the U.S. government?

Obama is responsible for the troops and the Americans serving abroad, even while sleeping. If he doesn't do something (yes, like sending in additional troops), who will? He gets those big perks because he has a big responsibility as CoC.

Wow.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"For fiscal 2013, the GOP-controlled House proposed spending $1.934 billion for the State Department Worldwide Security Protection programs; well below the $2.15 billion requested by the Obama administration. House Republicans cut the administrations request for embassy security funding by $128 million in fiscal 2011 and $331 million in fiscal 2012."

Ask Jason Chaffetz why there was inadequate security.

This was a breakdown on many levels. Obama bears some blame. Clinton bears some blame.
Congress bears some blame.

Any idea how many other security requests are being ignored today? Lots I am sure.

If it makes you sleep better, demonize Clinton and Obama.

People are far more concerned on placing blame that working to insure that it does not happen again.

That is partisanship at its worst.

Have you called your congressmen to request that they allocate more money for Embassy security? Would you support allocating more money?

out of posts

LoveLife
Riverton, UT

Joe, how exactly do you assure it never happens again if the same people are in charge and not held accountable?

About the budget:
Charlene Lamb, Deputy Asst. Secretary for Diplomatic Security, under oath:

"Asked if there was any budget consideration that led her not to increase the security force, she said: 'No.'

She added: "This was an unprecedented attack in size." Asked again about budget issues, Lamb said: "Sir, if it's a volatile situation, we will move assets to cover that."

The money was turned down because the State Department budget had ballooned. Some of the expenses:

$16 million for Kindles ($6,600 each)
$7.9 billion for Obama's Global Health Initiative
$1 billion for global climate change
$2.2 billion to strengthen democratic institutions in Pakistan.
$4.5 million for art in embassies

No, I don't know about any security requests. I'm not supposed to know. If it were my job, I would know.

Why would anyone support more funding when there is already so much waste and abuse?

Getting the truth out there is not demonizing anyone, nor is it partisanship. It's just getting the truth, which is what everyone should want, regardless of party.

Sorry you are out of posts.

worf
Mcallen, TX

What?

You don't set any requirements on Obama.

Do you want the IRS after you?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments