Connect with us

Congress

Rand Paul Gives Graham/Cassidy a New Name: ‘Amnesty for ObamaCare’

Published

on

Senator Rand Paul is shaking things up in the Senate as always, this time giving the Graham/Cassidy bill a new name — “Amnesty for Obamacare.”

Trending: OUTRAGEOUS: Milwaukee Man Who was Defending His Home from a Leftist Mob is Arrested

Senator Paul, a career physician, has been a vocal opponent of Graham/Cassidy bill in favor of a full repeal. He has lead the fight against plans in both houses of Congress, referring to the proposals as “ObamaCare Lite” and demanding more significant changes.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“These have been plans that have spent nearly as much money as ObamaCare, that left most of the taxes and regulations in place, and basically failed to honor our promise of repeal,” the Kentucky senator wrote in an op-ed for Fox News.

The bill was introduced last week by Senators Bill Cassidy and Lindsey Graham, and aims to roll back the Obamacare Medicaid expansion and give money from deconstructing ACA programs to states so that they can run their own health care programs. Senator Paul argues that it is actually just “a redistribution of ObamaCare taxes and a new Republican entitlement program, funded nearly as extravagantly as ObamaCare.”

“This isn’t a repeal. This is keeping Obamacare and redistributing the proceeds,” Paul told CNN. “So, this is not a repeal bill, this is sort of, ‘Hey, we’ll take Obamacare, replace it with Obamacare, but we’re going to let the states have a little more power in how we spend it.'”

Senator Paul has pointed to the fact that Graham/Cassidy does not repeal a single ObamaCare insurance regulation. He also wants people to understand that the new bill would still spend 90 percent of what we currently spend on ObamaCare.

“Graham/Cassidy won’t fix our health care problems, and it will become a permanent drain on the treasury – one that is already $20 trillion in debt, with a $700 billion deficit next year,” Paul’s op-ed continued. He argued that a full repeal, as the GOP has repeatedly promised, would saved over a trillion dollars in spending over 10 years.

The outspoken senator also blasted the major sales pitch being used to push the bill, that “if you like your ObamaCare, you can keep it.”

“That’s nice, but I don’t like it, I don’t want to keep it, and I don’t want to keep paying for it.  So how about we all keep our word and get rid of it?” Paul wrote.

Despite pleas from his colleagues to get on board, Senator Paul will not be doing so, and has vowed to vote no on amnesty for Obama’s failed healthcare legacy.

Congress

FLASHBACK: Three Recent Supreme Court Justices Were Confirmed Within 45 Days

There’s ample precedent for a quick confirmation.

Published

on

There are 45 days until the November 3rd presidential election, and there’s ample precedent for an expedited confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice in such a timeframe following a vacancy.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg died on Friday, setting up a possible contentious confirmation process to fill her seat. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is pledging that a tentative Trump administration nominee for the position will receive a vote on the Senate floor, despite outrage and indignation on the part of progressives falsely maintaining that McConnell is breaking precedent he set by refusing to confirm Merrick Garland. President Obama tried to get Garland confirmed when the opposing party controlled the Senate, a divided government that does not exist in 2020.

Ruth Bader Ginsberg herself was formally nominated by President Clinton on June 22nd, 1993. Her confirmation process began on July 20th, and she was confirmed on August 3rd, with a total of 42 days elapsing between her nomination and confirmation.

John Paul Stevens’ nomination was advanced and confirmed in a speedy 19 days, and Sandra Day O’Connor was confirmed in 1981 in a total of 33 days.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

In fact, every single Supreme Court nomination of the past 45 years was nominated and voted upon within a shorter duration of the time remaining in Donald Trump’s first presidential term.

There’s actually wide precedent for nominating and confirming a Supreme Court justice within the confines of President Trump’s first term, and Democrats are being untruthful or erroneous to suggest otherwise.

McConnell is beginning initial work to advance confirmation hearings, with potential liberal Republicans such as Mitt Romney, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski presenting themselves as possible holdouts. It is possible to approve a judge with 50 votes in the Senate and a Vice Presidential tiebreaker.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending