It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New Healthcare Bill uses YOUR money to buy Viagra for sex offenders???WTH?

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 08:30 AM
Dems had a second chance at voting against this section Wednesday when the bill returned to be ammended and they voted AGAINST taking that part out of it!
Why would Dems want sex offenders to have free Viagra? Am I understanding this correctly?

By 57-42, Democrats rejected an amendment by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., barring federal purchases of Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs for sex offenders. Coburn said it would save millions of dollars, while Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., called it "a crass political stunt."

what other creepy crap is in this bill?

[edit on 25-3-2010 by joey_hv]

posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:23 AM
I think you're misinterpreting how this works.

There is no specific language in the bill that allows sex offenders to get their hands on federally funded Erectile Dysfunction drugs. (of course, there's nothing in the current bill that says they can't either) The amendment was being introduced to add that little tidbit.

See, the democrats don't want any changes made to the bill. The republicans, on the other hand, want the bill to go back to the house where it has to be voted on again. Any change in the current language, and back it goes.

Apparently, the republicans have succeeded, as there are now changes in the language, and both houses must approve identical bills.

GOP succeeds in forcing another House vote on health care

I can only imagine the laughter when they came up with that proposed amendment though.

I mean, if the democrats had agreed to add the language, the republicans get what they want and it goes back to the house. If not, they can bring it up later as fuel for their partisan war.

Now some might think that it's just a sleazy tactic by the republicans to get an amendment in there, but it also says volumes about how desperate the democrats are to keep it from heading for a new vote.

Either way, I say add it in since it's heading to the house anyway...


posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:27 AM
reply to post by lernmore

Yes I been following the battler of wills over the final bill that is been concocted in congress right now day in and day out for the past three days, congress has not work this much in all the miserable lives as politicians before.

This how the Republicans are going to get back to the Democrats when the time for elections comes.

Nothing but political game at our expenses.

posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:42 AM
The saddest part to all of this in my opinion is that both sides -- republicans and democrats -- appear to actually be reading the bill for the first time which is why the subject of new amendments is even coming up. Republicans say: "Look what we found! This is unacceptable." Then the Democrats say: "Let's see....what page was that on.... it. Let's vote again."

I personally am against this healthcare bill, however, even I think that it's ridiculous that we continue to spend money talking about, discussing, analyzing, and changing this legislation. It's time to move on and tackle the other areas in which we are in dire need of help.

This entire process -- by both sides -- has been handled completely incorrectly and leaves Americans with a bad taste in their mouth whether they agree or disagree about the bill in general.

Our government is dysfunctional to say the least. Further, the actual benefits to this bill do not even begin until 2014. We can't possibly drag this out for another 4 years!?

At this point, does anybody have any doubt that we will all be paying for this legislation for the next 4 years and by the time benefits are supposed to kick in, it won't look anything like it does now? Keep in mind, that a group of Democrats only voted in favor of the bill if certain changes were made. To date, I do not believe they have all even been addressed. Further, we have another election in 2012, and if someone other than Obama gets voted in I would imagine they will want to "tweak" the bill as well.

This is the most backwards method to passing legislation I have ever seen. Can you imagine going to buy a car and saying: "OK....I'm going to sign the contract as it is right now. However, understand that my signature is only valid if you make changes to the contract after I sign it. Then, for the next four years before actually getting my car, I am going to continue to read and revise the contract since I haven't really read it yet."

posted on Mar, 25 2010 @ 09:52 AM

Originally posted by lpowell0627
It's time to move on and tackle the other areas in which we are in dire need of help.

I totally agree on this point but how about we scrap this ugly bill and shelve it until...oh lets say we don't bring up the subject again until unemployment is back up to single digits???

new topics

top topics

log in