[AMV] Amerikaanse politiek #610 Healthcare Bad Mmmkay!

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 18:29 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

ABCPolitics twitterde op woensdag 27-03-2019 om 17:20:02 President Trump says if a lawsuit to overturn Obamacare is upheld by the Supreme Court, "we will have a plan that's far better than Obamacare," but he does not provide any specifics on the plan https://t.co/3q1WvYJNtW https://t.co/kGijUAITcq reageer retweet

Ik gok: Kindertjes maken. Kindertjes maken is gezond! Ja.

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 19:10 schreef OMG het volgende:
Omdat het 1 grote fopstemming was.

Iets waarvan de repubs weten dat het het niet haalt op de vloer laten komen, maar dingen zoals iets over het Mueller rapport meten blokkeren.

Zo moeilijk is het niet.

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 18:58 schreef Chivaz het volgende:
Ik las net dat de green new deal weggestemd is, een geweldige nederlaag voor AOC.
Nu herinner ik mezelf dat er een aantal presidentskandidaten in de senaat zitten die ook niet voor hebben gestemd ondanks het feit dat ze het plan steunden.
Is er al een journalist langsgeweest om eens te vragen hoe het precies zit of vinden de journalisten het niet intressant?

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 19:14 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:

[..]

Zeker, waarom heb je zelf geen moeite genomen het uit te zoeken?

https://www.vox.com/platf(...)-deal-democrats-vote

Ook geen nederlaag voor AOC: Ocasio-Cortez says she encouraged Senate Dems to vote 'present' on Green New Deal

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 19:35 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Dus ze wilt zelf niet dat er over gestemd word omdat het een idioot plan is?

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 19:36 schreef OMG het volgende:
Dat staat dus helemaal niet in dat artikel. Godsamme zeg.

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 19:50 schreef Chivaz het volgende:

[..]

Dat is de conclusie die ik trek uit dat artikel. Je presenteert een idioot plan, het plan word belachelijk gemaakt en daarna kom je met een kutsmoes dat het niet het juiste plan was.
In de tussentijd is elke presidentskandidaat er als de kippen bij om dat plan te steunen en is er sindsdien geen enkele kritische vraag gesteld door de media.
En nu er over gestemd kan worden zodat iedereen kleur kan bekennen dan wilt men niet dat er over gestemd word.
Ik kan dan toch niet anders concluderen dat men het een idioot plan vind?
Vind je het zelf niet een tikkeltje vreemd dat er geen enkele kritische vraag gesteld is over dat plan aan de presidentskandidaten?

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 19:10 schreef OMG het volgende:
Omdat het 1 grote fopstemming was.

Iets waarvan de repubs weten dat het het niet haalt op de vloer laten komen, maar dingen zoals iets over het Mueller rapport meten blokkeren.

Zo moeilijk is het niet.

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 19:55 schreef Re het volgende:

[..]

Nee

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 19:55 schreef Re het volgende:

[..]

quote voor rechtse ultieme domheid

quote:

Op woensdag 27 maart 2019 20:10 schreef Ensiferum het volgende:

[..]

Als zelfs de medeschrijver niet voor stemt, laat het al zien dat de Green New Deal belachelijk was. Niet achter je eigen voorstellen staan

twitter:

EliStokols twitterde op woensdag 27-03-2019 om 22:22:13 Trump has signed 101 executive orders. He loves the photo ops of signing ceremonies, but as @Noahbierman reports, "generally the orders created committees or task forces, demanded reports or pressed for enforcement of existing laws."https://t.co/VOJu8NfoOq reageer retweet

SPOILER

Om spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.

quote:

A seated President Trump handed commemorative pens to his wife, daughter and eight others who hovered around his desk, then theatrically held up for the cameras the latest executive order bearing his oversize signature.

He had done “something that people have wanted presidents to do for a long time,” a triumphant Trump told the applauding military families who packed the White House East Room. “We will now ensure that you have better access to federal jobs.”

Yet 11 months later, it’s clear that the four-page document he signed in May did no such thing.

The order provided no money, created no policies and added no hiring authority. It merely required federal officials to post notices on their websites and draft reports about an order signed a decade earlier by President George W. Bush, which allowed agencies to waive competitive hiring requirements for military spouses in some circumstances.

The substance mattered little, however. For a president who relishes pomp and shows of executive action, unchecked by Congress, signing ceremonies have become a hallmark, a way to convey accomplishment for a man who asserts he has done more than any president in history.

The Times reviewed 101 executive orders Trump has signed since inauguration day, and interviewed experts, advocates and administration officials about their effects. Many were geared toward favored political constituencies, including veterans, blue-collar workers and evangelical Christians. Few moved policy significantly; generally the orders created committees or task forces, demanded reports or pressed for enforcement of existing laws.

Trump’s boldest unilateral actions, the ones that have provoked the most vigorous objections to his use of presidential power, were not carried out through executive orders.

SPOILER

Om spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.

twitter:

ddiamond twitterde op woensdag 27-03-2019 om 22:06:19 The Trump administration wants to nationalize Medicaid work requirements — but a federal judge just struck them down in Arkansas and Kentucky. This is big and @rachanadixit has the story. https://t.co/UyVKsktWO0 reageer retweet

quote:

A federal judge today blocked new work requirements on Medicaid recipients for a second time, dealing another blow to the Trump administration's efforts to reshape the safety net health care program.

U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg ruled that the federal government failed to justify that adding employment conditions and other changes to Medicaid in Arkansas and Kentucky advanced Medicaid's basic purpose of providing health coverage. Imposing work rules has been a signature issue of Trump's health department and conservative governors.

“The Court cannot concur that the Medicaid Act leaves the [HHS] Secretary so unconstrained, nor that the states are so armed to refashion the program Congress designed in any way they choose,“ wrote Boasberg, an Obama appointee named to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 2011.

More than 18,000 low-income adults in Arkansas were thrown off Medicaid late last year for failing to meet requirements that they work or participate in another job-related activity for at least 80 hours per month in order to keep their health care. Kentucky's work rules — which aren't yet in place — are projected to reduce that state’s Medicaid rolls by 95,000 residents. The Trump administration has approved work rules in a total of nine states, and more applications are pending.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 27-03-2019 om 22:45:05 Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano claims that the Mueller report is 700 pages. Unclear how he knows that. He gives no explanation and is not asked how he knows that. But he claims it is 700 pages multiple times.https://t.co/vKNm8Mx0ZI reageer retweet

Fox News' Judge Napolitano: 'There Is Something There' on Conspiracy in Mueller Report

quote:

‘There is something there, but it is not enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,’ the Fox News senior judicial analyst said Wednesday.

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano warned Fox viewers Wednesday that the still-unseen report from Special Counsel Robert Mueller likely contains evidence pointing to conspiracy and obstruction that Democrats will be able to seize on over the coming months and into the 2020 presidential election.

Following the release of Attorney General William Barr’s summary of Mueller’s report that states the special counsel did not find that the Trump campaign conspired with Russia in its 2016 election interference, House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) doubled down on his claim that Trump colluded with Russia.

“Undoubtedly there is collusion,” Schiff told The Washington Post, adding that he’ll continue to investigate whether the president was “compromised in any way by a hostile foreign power.”

Appearing on Fox Business Network’s Cavuto Coast to Coast Wednesday, Napolitano attempted to explain exactly where Schiff was coming from by getting inside his “head.”

“We saw on Sunday a four-page summary of a 700-page report,” the Fox analyst said. “The 700-page report is a summary of two million pages of documents, of raw evidence.”

SPOILER

Om spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.

twitter:

HowardSchultz twitterde op woensdag 27-03-2019 om 23:21:10 Wow. Barbara Bush comments to @USATODAY's @SusanPage, saying she no longer considers herself a Republican. Imagine what governing from the center could do for America. https://t.co/nNDodfxhze reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op woensdag 27-03-2019 om 23:30:00 Pelosi announced today that House Dems were introducing HR 9, the Climate Action Now Act, which aims to keep the U.S. in the Paris climate agreement. It's one of the first 10 bills introduced by the new majority and will likely come to a vote this year. https://t.co/bjpSYAhB8R reageer retweet

quote:

After a raucous day of Senate Republicans trolling Democrats on a Green New Deal vote, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday morning stepped up with a clear message: Climate change is a pillar of House Democrats’ legislative agenda in the new Congress.

In a press conference, Pelosi announced that House Democrats were introducing HR 9, the Climate Action Now Act, which aims to keep the United States in the 2015 Paris climate agreement. It’s one of the first 10 bills introduced by the new House majority and will likely come to a vote this year.

The suite of proposals from congressional Democrats to fight climate change range from pricing carbon dioxide to the expansive Green New Deal resolution. But HR 9 is the first actual climate bill — the others are proposals and resolutions — and Democrats say the fact that it’s one of the first bills of the new Congress shows how serious they are about fighting climate change.

“Our caucus has made [climate change] a caucus-wide priority,” Pelosi said. “This bill is only step one.”

While Republicans still hold the White House and the Senate and are unlikely to pass any climate legislation, House Democrats are signaling to their base that they are serious about action. And with HR 9, they’re also trying to tell the rest of the world that people in the United States still want to uphold their obligations to cut greenhouse gas emissions under the Paris accord.

SPOILER

Om spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.

twitter:

SenSchumer twitterde op woensdag 27-03-2019 om 19:08:56 I’m launching the @SenateDems’ Special Committee on the Climate Crisis.The consequences of inaction are disastrous.We must have a group of senators dedicated to devising a plan of action.While Republicans deny science, Democrats know we must act.https://t.co/gquyIE8Jcv https://t.co/7iC4alfPw9 reageer retweet

But the Senate and White House remain in Republican hands, which is likely to thwart any action.

Just this week, the Green New Deal resolution introduced by Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) failed a procedural motion in the Senate by 57 votes, including from four senators who caucus with Democrats. No one voted in favor of the resolution, as Democrats decried the vote as a stunt.

However, environmental advocates say such measures are still worthwhile since they signal to the rest of the country — and the world — that Americans are trying to fight climate change. “Obviously, if we’re only going to do things that will pass the Senate, then everyone should just go home,” Haq said. “It at least shows we have leadership that is ready to act in Washington.”

Some Republicans are starting to come up with their own counterproposals on climate policy. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) told Politico he is drafting a “Green Real Deal” to fight climate change. And Senate Republicans are leaning into innovation and research as a tactic to limit greenhouse gases.

twitter:

burgessev twitterde op maandag 25-03-2019 om 20:48:30 GOP Sen. Alexander comes to the floor, says climate change is real, then proposes launching a "new Manhattan project for clean energy" reageer retweet

But, again, these proposals would still have to gain President Trump’s signature, which seems ... unlikely. Where these climate proposals are already having an effect is in distinguishing Democratic 2020 presidential contenders in a crowded field. Some have already come out in favor of the Green New Deal while others have staked out less ambitious policies. But none can ignore climate change.

“We’re laying the foundation for the next Congress to move on climate, which, of course, will be impacted by the next election,” said Andrea McGimsey, the senior director for global warming solutions at Environment America.