In telephone townhall, Perriello explains vote
Published: November 13, 2009
Updated: November 13, 2009
Rep. Tom Perriello, D-Ivy, on Thursday held a telephone townhall with more than 8,000 participants to explain his vote in favor of the $1.2 trillion health-care overhaul bill approved by the House.
Meantime, Rep. Glenn Nye, D-2nd, took heat from the left, as a progressive group launched an online ad campaign accusing him of “betraying” the Democratic Party by voting against the health-care bill.
Perriello was one of four Virginia Democrats who voted in favor of the bill late Saturday night. Nye was one of the two Democrats who joined the five Virginia Republicans in voting against the measure.
Perriello said during the phone meeting that he voted for the bill because he thinks it will reduce the deficit, bring down the cost of insurance premiums, extend the solvency of Medicare and reduce a coverage gap in the federal prescription-drug program.
Perriello fielded about 15 calls from constituents. Some opposed the bill; others backed it or had questions about specific provisions.
“I don’t expect everyone to be satisfied with the call tonight, or the debate,” he said. But “we will never balance the budget in this country without getting health-care costs under control.”
He told one caller that given the increasing cost of insurance premiums: “the biggest tax we could put on the American people is doing nothing about health care.”
Perriello said that when he held 21 townhall meetings in August he recognized that “there was going to be nothing that made everybody happy.”
Supporters of Organizing for America, a grass-roots project of the Democratic National Committee, gathered at Perriello’s Charlottesville office Thursday to thank him for backing the health-care package. Today they will meet at Perriello’s Martinsville office.
Reader Reactions
antiboyd I know the jails and fines were on this post, but it seems to have disappeared and I could have sworn you wrote it.
Now I hear an English teacher at Albemarle school is teaching her class the same lies. What politics is doing in English class is a big question.
I asked for who ever posts such distortions to come forward and prove what section in the bill the language appears. Do not post some news story. Post the section from the bill.
On another post you asked where it said physicians would get more funds from this bill. I responded with Sec.321-325. In that post I also said that Sec. 233 was something I asked for.
I never saw a response from you.
Some people in self help groups are overwhelmed with big problems. So much that they shut down and never take steps toward accomplishing them. Threw the group and discussion they are lead to understand, big problems require one step at a time. One needs to put one step before the other.
The problem is big and to illustrate a large problem, the slogan “Eat an elephant one bite at a time” was introduced. If anyone knows anything about self help groups, they are hep on slogans.
Well, sir, you mixed me up with someone else’s comments, once again—I never mentioned jail, or fines for that matter.
And, pray tell, what would you like ME to point out regarding Sections 321 through 325, that has anything to do with MY comments and/or POV? What distortions are you talking about? Be specific, please.
Is it your learned, well-read contention that there are no provisions for a reduction in Medicare services? That there are no tax increases? What distortions, Gordie.
You are spouting nonsense on the “elephant” reference. First, I am aware that it is a phrase tied to a particular “Selg Help” methodology. You are dead wrong to say that I have ever—ever—claimed to be involved in such programs. I did claim to be involved in things like the Bridge Ministry (not sure where elephants are involved there), PACEM (homeless, but no elephants), IMPACT (all kinds of folks, still no pachyderms), Habitat (still no sign of ‘phants. Meals on Wheels (I’ve yet to deliver any smoked elephant, baked elephant, fileted elephant), Reading Buddies (Curious George, yes, elephants, no).
Have you always been so thick?
I was simply asking Anti the question because I have not read it, and he has read some of it.
Gordie, you make posts more good later, when home you get to at…ok?
nightmare on, Gordie, you’ll be six feet under by then, and still spouting nonsense
antiboyd just another voice filled with distortion who has problems understanding what he reads. When you are shown up for your distortions you crawl back into a hole, waiting for the next chance to bring out distortions. The retreat to fight another day suits well in this case. Too bad the fight has no substance and is filled with distortions.
Okay you challenged me to point out Sec 321 to 325.
Now their is the challenge to you to post the sections that say a person will be fined and end up in jail.
Clown. You claimed to be in the self help programs and don’t know what “eating an elephant one bite” at a time means. Sounds like you are full of it. And not elephants.
There isn’t Medicare for all.
But that is coming in 2013.
Anti, did you see anything about it being manditory to buy the plan? And if you refused you would be fined or put in jail?
Or is this just another dark side rumor?
That goes without saying. Have you? I have slogged through quite a bit of it. I have to say, the shortened “summaries” are woefully incomplete, and as such misleading.
Hard to imagine what the Gordmeister is hinting at with the “bill did not go far enough”—not enogh cuts in Medicare? not enough taxes? not enough new unaccountable comissions and czars set up to control ever aspect of healthcare—I heard a hundred by so far I have only tallied 27?
In one sense we do agree—a giant step backward is not going far enough.
As far as eating elephants goes—I have no appetite for them, nor for ‘donkeys’, nor for greedy little piggies. Do nothing is, indeed, not an option. But this bill, like the cap and trade bill before it, the “stimulus” bill before that, is bad medicine, bad steardship, and political masturbation that the majority of Americans neither want, nor need.
BTW, that “doctors” and “business owners” spoke, and that there are a few on the fringe, neither suprises nor impresses me—after all, the do-nothing’s have theirs, too. Heck one of three docs still belong to the AMA—it doesn’t make them spokespeople for the mainstream. Ditto “businessmen”—I mean, they trot out cretins like Boyd, and Snow, and Thomas, and call these folks businessmen—so both extremes have their dancing monkeys.
Where are any of these p[eople when it comes to supporting existing social programs that are not government run?
Easy to tax and spend OPM.
I would bet money tom is the one who has not read the bill. The people against this are not unintelligent hillbillies but people who understand that Government has proven itself incapable of running a program anywhere near this size. The downside is akin to riding a tobbagan down a mountainside. If you make it down fine,, if you realize half way down its going to crash there is no turning back.
Seems to me Obama should have spent more time thinking about healthcare before he acted and putsome of that effort into Afghanastan.
Gee, gues my vote for Tom did not count, big boy.
Read the bill yet? Of course not.
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement