A leading House Democrat talks up “bipartisan” changes to Obamacare:
Democratic Rep. James Clyburn told Fox News he welcomes the upcoming debate. “The question is, what will be the tone?” he added, urging Republicans to stop describing the bill as “job-killing.”
Clyburn predicted that an all-out repeal would go nowhere. But he indicated a willingness to “modify” parts of the legislation that could be improved.
“I believe that we all remember that when we passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we had to modify three or four times — it was done in a bipartisan way. Same thing with the Voting Rights Act. So let us modify the health care law in a bipartisan way. But this whole stuff of repealing it, throwing it out and starting all over, that’s not going to happen,” the South Carolina congressman said.
“I believe that we all remember that when we passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, we had to modify three or four times — it was done in a bipartisan way. "
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse.
Really?
I thought, according to the Democrats and the MSM, that Republicans were racist bigots that never wanted to free the slaves, and wanted Jim Crow to stay in place forever.
"Stop describing the bills as 'job killing.' And stop calling us 'tax and spenders'...and 'weak on defense' and 'weak on crime' and 'in the pockets of the unions' ...and 'global warming fanatics' ....and...and....."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOf course, the Civil Rights Act -- unlike PPACA -- was itself bipartisan.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"So if you want to make a few minor changes so your side can claim it accomplished something and we can claim Obamacare is bipartisan, fine.
But if you actually try to do something... nah."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf the only thing he wants to change is the name and not the substance, then I am good with it.
However, changing the name of the bill because it has "killing" in it is on the ridiculous side of things. It could have been an Onion headline before the shooting. It is political correctness run a muck.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRep. Clyburn represents me in Congress. He is such an embarrassment. He should spend his time in the minority studying the Constitution.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI won't be the least bit surprised if Rep. Clyburn's idea of bipartisanship is Republicans agreeing to give Democrats everything they want. If Democrats were interested in bipartisanship, they would have been more cooperative the first time around instead of using their Congressional majority to bludgeon Republicans and the American people with a 2000 page healthcare bill no one had time to read.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusethere was more bipartisan opposition to health care insurance reform than support.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTone? Seriously, Mr. Clyburn? You talk about tone? What about the tone of that infamous walk on the Sunday that Obamacare was voted through?
What's worse, calling a bill, inanimate object "job killing" or branding your political opponents as "racists"? I sure wish a reporter would pose that question to Mr. Clyburn.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe leftists think they can beat the GOP indefinitely with the "civility" cudgel. So far they're right. I blame the "conservatives" who have gone along with this nonsense starting with Rich Lowery.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTake out the word job,and leave the word killing because that's the more immediate concern with obamacre.saving lives should be the real motivation behind repeal.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"But this whole stuff of repealing it, throwing it out and starting all over, that’s not going to happen,” the South Carolina congressman said"
You mean, until January 2013 - when you lose your seat?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWe should start making the short list of who needs to be ruining their neighbor's lives instead of ours.
Repeal it or rot.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWithout making any comments about the civility of Rep Clyburn personally, he and his party are in no position to ask for bipartisan efforts to amend this bill.
They rammed down the vote on party lines. This partisan effort was unlike the Voting Rights Act or the Civil Rights Act.
In fact, the Civil Rights Act had a higher percentage of GOP votes than the Democrat party.
Thus, efforts to amend the two civil rights acts, and other landmark bills, such as Social Security or Medicare, could be done, and were done, in a bipartisan basis.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIIRC, ObamaCare passed in the House without a single Republican vote, and via shenanigans that would have made Caligula blush.
And *now* we have calls for bipartisanship.
Feh. Spare me.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNOW he wants bipartisanship? When they were writing this 2,00 page behemoth they would have none of it. They even falsely accused (and the media went with it) the right of not having any of their own ideas on the table. Why should we go along with any bipartisan ideas now? They had their chance. Repeal it and start over Republicans or lose everything you have gained.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseImplicitly comparing ACA/ObamaCare to the Civil Rights Act of 64 is OBSCENE. The Civil Rights Act was Bipartisan because it was basically good legislation that remedied a grave evil. ObamaCare is not Bipartisan because it is terrible legislation that violates basic concepts of American liberty by forcing Americans to buy a product they may not want, it will decrease the quality of care, eventually force rationing, and perhaps most importantly we can't afford it, either as individuals (Our premiums will increase), or as a country (costs will balloon, like in MA, and it will increase the national debt by trillions over the years). Don't ever let a Democrat get away with comparing a law that remedied bigotry, with one that damages our healthcare system, our economy and the fisc - Clyburn is up to the old Dem trick of very subtly implying bigotry is the reason to oppose ObamaCare. Shame.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBipartisan? Here's an idea for bipartisan. How about everyone who voted for this monstrosity voluntarily walk slowly from San Diego, California to Bangor, Maine while wearing sackcloth and ashes, and chanting "Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa" as they walk. Those Democrats and Republicans who voted against the bill could provide water and snacks for the perpetrators along the way, along with ointment for blisters and sore feet. That would be bipartisan.
Enough of this posturing. Repeal it. That would also, by necessity, be bipartisan.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRep. Clyburn, as far as I am concerned, can place his faux bipartisan sentiments where the sun don't shine.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere is nothing about Clyburn that is bi-partisan. The only way this man gets elected is his gerry-mandered district. That district has lived thirty years longer than it should have. It is time to remove gerry-mandered districts. If a black man can be president we do not need gerry mandered districts. Time to let go of the old ways and move on. SC has an Indiam-American in our state house and a black man as a representative. The gerry mandered district needs to go away now.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse