Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 11:37 AM ET, 12/22/2010

Deal reached on 9/11 bill, clearing way for passage

By Greg Sargent

UPDATE, 12:32 p.m.: Mike McAuliffe is reporting that a deal has finally been reached. More soon.

....and a source close to the negotiations confirms to me that a deal has indeed been struck. Details soon...

UPDATE, 12:43 p.m.: Senate aides say they are now hopeful they can pass the bill via "unanimous consent," which means it can happen quickly today. More when I learn it.

UPDATE, 1:08 p.m.: GOP Senator Mike Enzi, one of the lead Republican negotiators on the 9/11 bill, supports the deal, Enzi spokesperson Jessica Straus confirms to me. That's a big step forward: It means Republicans are on board, which makes "unanimous consent" passage -- which is the fastest way forward -- more likely.

Straus also confirms to me that the deal trims the cost of the bill from $6.2 billion to $4.2 billion.

UPDATE, 1:25 p.m.: Here are the details of the deal, as provided by a Senate aide:

*Reduction in Costs. This agreement saved taxpayers $6.2 billion from the substitute amendment and $7.5 billion from the House-passed bill. In the deal, costs are reduced to $4.2 billion in the 10 year window and eliminated outside the 10-year window. Of that amount, $1.5 billion will go to health benefits, while $2.7 billion will go to compensation.

* Permanently Close the Victims Compensation Fund (VCF) after 5 years. The original bill kept the VCF open through 2031, making it extremely susceptible to waste, fraud and abuse and incurring significant long-term costs. The fund is now open only through 2016 and has language to expressly say that it is permanently closed at after 5 years.

*Limitations on Attorneys Fees. Places a hard cap for attorneys' fees at 10 percent of the total award and allows the Special Master to reduce attorneys fees [Coburn] believes are excessive.

* Prevents Reinstatement of Civil Claims. Prevent claimants who are rejected from the VCF from then pursuing a civil lawsuit. This is consistent with the earlier VCF policy.

*Limitation on Infrastructure Costs. Explicitly excludes construction and capital projects from health care spending in the bill.

*Commitment to ensure eligible individuals cannot "double-dip" on benefits. The Senators all agreed to get in writing from the Special Master that he will include workers compensation benefits in collateral sources of benefits that he must offset from potential compensation awards.

* More Accountability. Require claims-level data reporting to provide accountability and opportunity for oversight, as well as GAO reports to determine less expensive mechanisms to provide nationwide care, pharmaceutical access, and health information technology promotion.

The key here is the top bullet point -- whether the reduction in the amounts for benefits and compensation means a cut in benefits for individual first responders or a reduction in the number eligible. The Senate aide who sent this over insists the deal doesn't lead to this.

"It essentially caps the costs and sets a deadline," the aide says.

********************************************************************

ORIGINAL POST:

Talks over the 9/11 health bill are at an impasse after Senator Tom Coburn refused to back down off his demand that the bill's price tag come down, casting doubt on whether it can pass today, according to multiple sources on both sides of the talks.

Senator Chuck Schumer said this morning that a vote on the measure is set for this afternoon. But according to a Senate Democratic aide, Harry Reid's office has not agreed to this yet, because Senator Coburn is still holding out against it. What's more, the vote may be held up by Republicans who are delaying the New START final vote to avoid the showdown over the 9/11 bill.

The current state of play, which is changing rapidly, is a bit at odds with the public picture of what's happening. The impression you get from liberal blogs and MSNBC is that Republicans are under such intense pressure to pass this that they are about to crack. While things are certainly trending this way in some respects, it's not assured.

Supporters of the bill remain confident that they have the votes to pass the bill with the help of a handful of GOP moderates, and they say rank and file Republicans, desperate to put the issue behind them, are insisting that their leadership agree to the bill. But the picture is complex, and the outstanding issue remains when it can pass.

Here's the situation, as described by aides on both sides. Private talks dragged late into the night between Senators pushing for the bill, such as Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, and those pushing for changes, like Coburn and Mike Enzi. Harry Reid was also in on the talks.

Coburn reiterated his insistence that the cost of the bill be brought down and refused to back off his position, according to sources. Dems object because if Coburn's demands are met, it could drastically reduce the health benefits enjoyed by 9/11 responders, according to a source close to the talks.


Reid -- and even some Republican -- want to pass the bill via what's know as "unanimous consent," which would allow it to pass quickly and be done with as long as no senators object. But the Dem leadership remains concerned that Coburn will object, scuttling this route forward. That's why Reid has not yet agreed to a vote this afternoon, sources say.

If a deal isn't reached with Coburn by this evening, sources say, Dems will forge forward with a standard cloture vote. They believe they have 60 votes for it, and are willing to call Coburn's bluff. They say that once the bill passes cloture with bipartisan support, this will intensify the pressure on Coburn to not resort to procedural delays to stall final passage.

The one potential hitch is that if this route is used -- rather than the quicker "unanimous consent" path -- the process could drag into the week after Christmas, and some worry that House Dems might not come back to the Capitol in the necessary numbers to pass the bill out of the House. But others dismiss that concern.

So that's where we are. More when I learn it.

By Greg Sargent  | December 22, 2010; 11:37 AM ET
Categories:  Foreign policy and national security, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Morning Plum
Next: Obama's indefinite detention policy: A more humane version of Bush

Comments

Greg, you're doing awesome work. Keep it up. Thank you. sl

Posted by: start_loving | December 22, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Wonderfully detailed and clearly-presented explanation. This blog is a treasure

Posted by: caothien9 | December 22, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

thanks guys, appreciate it.

and really appreciate your contributions to the comments section, too.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | December 22, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

ZOMG like Obama needs to put his cape on and fly around the chamber of the Senate and exert his like wowzers leadership on this issue and if he doesn't he's like Jimmy Carter reincarnated and stuff.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 22, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

I third the congrats.

Coburn is a nasty piece of business.

'With Congress wrapping up its legislative session soon, approximately 50 first responders traveled to the nation’s capital from New York yesterday in an attempt to sit down with the obstructionist senators and persuade Coburn and other Republicans to allow a vote on the bill.

ThinkProgress met with the group as it visited Coburn’s office. The first responders calmly explained to Coburn’s staff why they were there and requested a meeting. Instead, a meeting was denied and the staff demanded the first responders leave the office. After being made to wait outside the senator’s office for 20 minutes, the first responders finally left, singing “God Bless America” as they exited the Russell Senate office building"

These guys travel to DC from NY, and the creep Coburn has them thrown out on the street. You'd think after the gop wh*red on these 'american heroes'for so many years they could treat them a little better.

But we all know 'patriotism' is a hollow joke to the gopers, just another campaign slogan to roll the rubes.

Posted by: fiona5 | December 22, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

Yes. This blog has been a must read during the lame duck session. Thanks, Greg.

I say the Dems should push this even if it means they have to vote on Xmass eve or Xmass day. These people deserve health care. And a holiday should not get in the way of their lives. Force the Republicans on the issue. It would be dramatic, and it would display that lack of caring on the part of the Republicans.

Posted by: michiganmaine | December 22, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad to see that the Dr Coburn is standing fast. I will disappointed if the Republicans don't work hard to thwart all federal spending. All of it must be called into question. Every nickel, every agency, every program, every employee should be placed under a fiscal mircroscope.

I think that the liberals are going to hate this next congress. That's a good thing.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 22, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

I third the congrats.

Coburn is a nasty piece of business.

'With Congress wrapping up its legislative session soon, approximately 50 first responders traveled to the nation’s capital from New York yesterday in an attempt to sit down with the obstructionist senators and persuade Coburn and other Republicans to allow a vote on the bill.

ThinkProgress met with the group as it visited Coburn’s office. The first responders calmly explained to Coburn’s staff why they were there and requested a meeting. Instead, a meeting was denied and the staff demanded the first responders leave the office. After being made to wait outside the senator’s office for 20 minutes, the first responders finally left, singing “God Bless America” as they exited the Russell Senate office building"

These guys travel to DC from NY, and the creep Coburn has them thrown out on the street. You'd think after the gop wh*red on these 'american heroes'for so many years they could treat them a little better.

But we all know 'patriotism' is a hollow joke to the gopers, just another campaign slogan to roll the rubes.

Posted by: fiona5 | December 22, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

Count me among the many thanking you Greg for all the great updates and analysis of the lame duck congress. I know I can come here, and between you and the commenters, find out what's happening. I haven't had much time to comment myself or even "surf the web" but maybe next year.

Hope you have a teriffic holiday!!!!!!!!!

That goes for everyone BTW.

Posted by: lmsinca | December 22, 2010 12:14 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure the issue here. If they have the 60 votes, then why waste the time of trying to convince Coburn to agree to unanimous consent?

Tell him, and everyone else in the Senate, that you are bringing this up for unanimous consent. If it fails, it will go through the normal cloture process, and the Senate will be held in session through Christmas until they can hold a final vote.

Either he does, or he doesn't. If he does agree, you pass it quickly. If he doesn't, then you hold the Senate in session and you spend Xmas passing a bill providing health care to 9/11 first responders. Either option is a win on policy and on politics.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | December 22, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Hell, the Dems have already dropped the price tag on the Zadroga bill.
Coburn is an utter a-hole. It's quite a contest between Oklahoma and Arizona on who has the two biggest jerk offs in the Senate.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 22, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

"I'm glad to see that the Dr Coburn is standing fast. I will disappointed if the Republicans don't work hard to thwart all federal spending."

Calling you a "clueless clown" is an understatement. How about stopping all federal spending for the state of Oklahoma, and all deep Red states, and just let them go it alone?

Posted by: filmnoia | December 22, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Let me add my voice to the chorus of praise for you Greg. You have been phenomenal this whole period.

As for Tom Coburn, how does a grown man not escape the 3rd or 4th grade mentality of sticking it to someone just because you can? He is the least emotionally mature person in the Senate by a long shot. His behavior is more like what you'd expect from an 8-year-old than one of the most powerful people in the country in the most powerful country on Earth. It is truly despicable and disgusting that he thinks he is qualified to be dictator of 9/11 benefits while these incredible heroes are screaming at him from the sidelines as they suffer through debilitating diseases.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 22, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

filmnoia, there is so much competition.

Now, in other news, the Kochtopus is winning in the quest to destroy the planet:

'The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) has projected that the United States will lead the world into catastrophic global warming over the next twenty five years. In its 2011 Annual Energy Outlook, the EIA predicts that energy-related CO2 emissions will "grow by 16 percent [PDF] from 2009 to 2035," reaching 6.3 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (or 1.7 GtC):'

http://www.grist.org/article/2010-12-21-eia-projects-climate-catastrophe

Posted by: fiona5 | December 22, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Don't you mean "drastically reduce the health benefits enjoyed by 9/11 responders; or persons who were present in NYC on 9/11; or persons who worked, resided, or attended school, childcare, or adult daycare in NYC for (I) at least 4 days during the 4-month period beginning on 9/11/01 and ending on 1/10/02, or (II) at least 30 days during the period beginning on 9/11/01 and ending on 7/31/02 "?

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Tom Coburn is also busy fighting any attempt by the administration to send aid to the millions of stranded Haitians after the devastating earthquake that killed an estimated 200,000 people in what was already the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere.

Tom Coburn IS a piece of business.

Posted by: americanjew1971 | December 22, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

filmnoia-

spot on.

I'm gonna be unhappy with the next Congress, but not as a liberal, but as a sentient human being: http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/climate_change_denier_shimkus_to_head_environment_subcommittee_video.php?ref=fpb

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | December 22, 2010 12:35 PM | Report abuse

Well the Dems unfortunately have dropped the price tag a second time just to get the deal done. I hope Coburn, Enzi, et al rot in Hell.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 22, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Seems to me that since the 9/11 Responders help is going to be passed, one way or another, the only decision left to the GOP is how long they want this to stay in the news.

Another week with this in the news will leave Coburn bleeding from a thousand self imposed cuts.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | December 22, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

HA!

A PSA for John McCain: It Gets Worse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncUYEKz8In4

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 22, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

in response to this:
===========================
Calling you a "clueless clown" is an understatement. How about stopping all federal spending for the state of Oklahoma, and all deep Red states, and just let them go it alone?
===============================
It is clear that name calling is really all you've got. How sad that must be for you.
I'm a big fan of stopping almost all Federal Spending on just about everything. OK, OH or any other state. There are a raft of agencies that I believe should be disbanned and their staff cut loose.

So there.

If you've got something like a decent argument, by all means post it here. But I believe that name calling is all that most liberals have anymore. It must be just soooo tiresome for you now that the magical incantation "Racist" doesn't automatically shut up your opponents.

Sneering snide cynicism coupled with childish name calling is the most common response from liberals here. I strongly suggest that the left in America carry on with this behavior. Nothing I can imagine will do more to destroy that movement. Nastiness is hardly a flag around which Americans will rally. But why take my word for it? Look at the November election results. Worked well for you then didn't it?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 22, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

From the UPDATE:

Besides cutting the price for the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act from $6.2 billion, the time span was also significantly limited to five years each for the health treatment program and the reopened 9/11 Victims' Compensation Fund.

Other concessions that negotiators had to make to Coburn and Enzi included a hard cap on lawyers' fees at 10%, and even stronger reporting requirements and Government Accountability Office reviews than were already in the bill.

Although people who took money from the recent 9/11 lawsuit were already accounted for in the Zadroga bill, Republicans insisted on stronger language ensuring they could not double-dip, and get money both from the legal deal and the bill.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 12:46 PM | Report abuse

@claw,

Whatever happened to "Enough is Enough". I'm disappointed in you. I thought you were a hardliner.

Bwahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | December 22, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

What is it with Oklahoma?????

Posted by: danw1 | December 22, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

SERIOUS QUESTION


Why isn't this health care covered under the union contracts ????


It makes no sense


Also, where is all that money which was sent to the Red Cross for 9/11 ??? Bill them

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 22, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Does any one really expect something decent from a stupid, right-wing Republican imbecile?

Posted by: analyst72 | December 22, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

"What is it with Oklahoma?????"

That's an excellent question given their own history of a terrorist attack. I wonder how they'd have felt if the Senate had turned their back after Tim McVeigh's charming little visit.

Shorter GOP: "Anything more than a platitude is too expensive."

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 22, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

Republicans think the earth moved last month. It didn't. This is not 1994. Republicans have no popular leaders, no Presidential contender, their TP reinstalled people like Murkowski and Reid (before it died). They have no agenda apart from Bush/Cheney domestic policy (let rich people do whatever they want) and Reagan's revanchist view of the rest of the world. There is no Republican momentum. There is widespread disgust with the way both parties do their business.
Only the voters can fix that.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

"It is clear that name calling is really all you've got. How sad that must be for you.
I'm a big fan of stopping almost all Federal Spending on just about everything."

Unlike others here, I had been reserving my name calling for elected officials. However, since so much Right Wing crap has hit the fan I figure all bets are off.
I see a constant barrage from the Right with name calling whether calling Democrats "Dims" or referring to Obama as "Barry".
You want to stop all federal spending, ok, how about we start with the federal prison system in your state and get the TSA personnel out of all your airports? That's just for starters. If you're in Ohio, you're already in a state that is bankrupt.Let's see them handle their own security. How is the state going to pay for that? Taxes, no, can't have that.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 22, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues, my objections to this bill remain.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

That's an excellent question given their own history of a terrorist attack. I wonder how they'd have felt if the Senate had turned their back after Tim McVeigh's charming little visit.
--------------------------------------------------------
Maybe the next time there is a disaster, the responders should say "Wait a minute"...how about giving us a raise before we go into that building and save anyone. Just tell 'em to wait.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | December 22, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues, my objections to this bill remain.
---------------------------------------
Then you'll consider it a defeat when Coburn negotiates a deal? Guess Coburn is not as hardliner as you, eh?

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | December 22, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Greg

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 22, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

RainForestRising, our family no longer donates to them:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Red_Cross#September_11_controversy

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the next time there is a disaster, the responders should say "Wait a minute"...how about giving us a raise before we go into that building and save anyone. Just tell 'em to wait.
----------------------------------

They'd stand outside and filibuster until a super majority could be secured to go in.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 22, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

I wonder what's in the bill?

Nobody seems to care. Only that we want to give some cash to first responders without paying for it.

Nice one.

To actually think it through would be unpatriotic. Just ask Jon Stewart.

Posted by: Benson | December 22, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Greg.
can you explain to me, why this bill is needed. I was under the impression (maybe mistakenly) that these first responders were working for the city when they went in and did their brave deeds, so arn't they covered by their own health insurance or at least covered by workers compensation? Are the not getting service?

thanks George

Posted by: geighmy | December 22, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

12BarBlues, I guess not.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

the liberals here are just using the same old page from their tattered playbook. It goes like this: make an emotional appeal that costs billions then smear anybody with the nerve to question the expenditure.

Here's a very nice precis of the namesake of this bill, written by John Derbyshire:

"This is the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, advertised as, quote, “giving federal medical benefits to first-responders sick from Ground Zero dust.” I think we all know now by instinct that any congressional bill whose title contains a person’s name is deeply suspect. This one is a ripoff in so many ways I don’t have time to enumerate them all.

You can start with the eponymous James Zadroga. Who he? Well, he was a New York City police detective who spent some time at the World Trade Center site in Manhattan following 9/11. He developed a cough, so in 2004 the Police Department put him on permanent disability status. With Zadroga’s twelve years’ service, that means benefits around ninety thousand a year, inflation-proofed, all medical expenses covered free of charge. For life, Officer Zadroga being 33 years old at this point. This kind of thing is routine in big-city police departments, one of the reasons that the finances of our states are in such an unholy mess.

That same year, 2004, the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund also gave him a cash award. At this point Zadroga was set up very nicely for life, with all the medical attention he could want, all paid for by other people — i.e. by you and me — and a handsome income for doing no work at all. Fair enough, you may say: he was a first responder, and I won’t argue the point.

Then in 2006 James Zadroga died. What did he die from? According to an autopsy report signed off on by New York City’s two chief medical examiners, he died after injecting himself with ground-up prescription drugs in solution — nothing to do with 9/11 at all.

Once the Trial Lawyers Association see a big pile of taxpayer gold glittering on the horizon, though, there is no stopping them. Obviously they goofed by not stuffing those Chief Examiners’ pockets with cash before they wrote their report, but they came back with this James Zadroga Act."

So the liberals here are assisting the trial lawyers to six billion of our tax payer dollars. And the only argument they have in favor of this waste of our money is name calling.

shame, shame, shame.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 22, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

George, Benson, would you like me to post the part of the bill that matters, the part that goes to your questions anyway?

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

"Maybe the next time there is a disaster, the responders should say "Wait a minute"...how about giving us a raise before we go into that building and save anyone. Just tell 'em to wait."

Actually, it would have been better had the responders said "wait a minute." As an EMT, I've been taught to wait until the the building is deemed secure or the tech rescue guys have made their assessment. The first thing they teach you is "scene safety." If the scene is unsafe, you don't go in. entering an unsafe scene is the quickest way to create more victims.

Posted by: NoVAHockey | December 22, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Republicans think the earth moved last month. It didn't. This is not 1994.

Posted by: shrink2
+++++++++++

Spot on. Republicans in Congress have a lower approval rating than Democrats, and substantially lower than the President. Their 2012 Presidential primaries will be a clusterf**k of cra-zee. They have no policy ideas; the only goal that animates them is to deny Obama a second term.

Whatever momentum they had from the midterm election they have already squandered by being so obviously focused on slamming the President instead of working for the American people.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | December 22, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

It must be agony for conservative hardliners that they have NO heroes in Congress.

First, Coburn is becoming a RINO, right before our eyes.

And, the Red Cross is now a charity non grata. They probably helped the 9/11 responders too much, making them dependent on help as they die. I say, deny hospice care to 9/11 responders. We don't want them to feel entitled to oxygen.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | December 22, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

benson: "I wonder what's in the bill? Nobody seems to care. Only that we want to give some cash to first responders without paying for it."
------

Benson, go do your own homework. The bill is PAID FOR.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 22, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

Greg, can we have a contest to see who can put down the tea baggers hardest? I didn't know you read these comments, or I would have asked months ago, bro.

They get to throw down on us, too. Kinda like the 8 Mile battle raps, but political. Let's do this!

Posted by: danw1 | December 22, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Actually, it would have been better had the responders said "wait a minute."
----------------------------------------
So the 9/11 responders have only themselves to blame? Is that what you mean?

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | December 22, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Keep in mind that it's not limited to "first responders" either. I posted just some of the other people -- students, kids who were in daycare at the time -- as included above. Maybe if it was just "first responders" the cost would "only" be $2.1 billion.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

"As an EMT, I've been taught to wait until the the building is deemed secure or the tech rescue guys have made their assessment. The first thing they teach you is "scene safety." If the scene is unsafe, you don't go in. entering an unsafe scene is the quickest way to create more victims."
----------

Sure, and what you say is true. Some of these funds are for the people who worked recovery and clean up for weeks and months in the aftermath....and after Christie Todd Whitman said it was safe...

"Whitman appeared twice in New York City after the September 11 attacks to inform New Yorkers that the toxins released by the attacks posed no threat to their health.[24] On September 18, the EPA released a report in which Whitman said, "Given the scope of the tragedy from last week, I am glad to reassure the people of New York and Washington, D.C. that their air is safe to breathe and their water is safe to drink." She also said, "The concentrations are such that they don't pose a health hazard...We're going to make sure everybody is safe."[25] Later, a 2003 report by the EPA's inspector general determined that such assurances were misleading, because the EPA "did not have sufficient data and analyses" to justify the assertions when they were made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Todd_Whitman#EPA_Administrator

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 22, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

This bill covers any first responder/survivor that has no other insurance or entitlement fee basis to care for 9/11 related health care problems. If care can be paid for by workers comp, social security, health insurance or any other source apart from the person's own pocket, it will be.

This bill is to make sure people don't have to pay for medical problems directly caused by proximity to the 9/11 disaster sites.


‘‘(3) RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in
10 this title shall be construed to affect, modify, or re-
11 lieve any obligations under a worker’s compensation
12 law or plan, other work-related injury or illness ben-
13 efit plan of an employer, or any health insurance
14 plan.

15 ‘‘(c) HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE.—
16 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an individual
17 who has a WTC-related health condition that is not
18 work-related and has health coverage for such condi-
19 tion through any public or private health plan (in-
20 cluding health benefits under title XVIII, XIX, or
21 XXI of the Social Security Act) the provisions of
22 section 1862(b) of the Social Security Act shall
23 apply to such a health plan and such individual in
24 the same manner as they apply to group health plan
25 and an individual entitled to benefits under title


1 XVIII of such Act pursuant to section 226(a) of
2 such Act. Any costs for items and services covered
3 under such plan that are not reimbursed by such
4 health plan, due to the application of deductibles, co-
5 payments, coinsurance, other cost sharing, or other-
6 wise, are reimbursable under this title to the extent
7 that they are covered under the WTC Program. The
8 program under this title shall not be treated as a le-
9 gally liable party for purposes of applying section
10 1902(a)(25) of the Social Security Act.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Maybe if it was just "first responders" the cost would "only" be $2.1 billion.
----------------------------------------------------
Hold the line, claw. Don't negotiate yourself down to "only" 2.1b.

We count on you and a few others to be the hardheaded conservatives on this blog. Don't give an inch or a dollar.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | December 22, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

GET RID OF THE EPA!

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

shrink2, the problem is that workers compensation is already denying these claims, making this new fund PRIMARY coverage.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Look at the geographical distribution of opposition to this bill. Mostly from places far away from NYC. Reason: these people naturally don't empathize with other people anyway, and even less so when those other people are far away. Gomer in East Flatbush naturally thinks New Yorkers are thieves, and he either forgets or just doesn't care that the people this bill is helping did something heroic. Just relax, Gomer, collect your farm subsidies, and complain about something else.

Posted by: Rozinante2 | December 22, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

shrink2, the problem is that workers compensation is already denying these claims, making this new fund PRIMARY coverage.

------

Ya know what, why don't you just tell us what should happen with these people, rather than what shouldn't.

What, exactly, is your solution?

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 22, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

GET RID OF THE EPA!

Posted by: clawrence12
+++++++++++++++

And who will be responsible for implementing CERCLA, RCRA, SWDA, SDWA, CAA, CWA, TSCA, FIFRA, among other laws?

Oh, right. Industry will always do what is best from America, and the free market will protect us.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | December 22, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

George, Benson, would you like me to post the part of the bill that matters, the part that goes to your questions anyway?

Posted by: shrink2

-------------------------

Actually, your posts were pretty good. I fail to understand why 90% of the coverage about this covers the politics, but not what's in the bill itself.

It actually looks like a pretty good bill, now that some limits have been put into it, and assuming the costs are covered.

Posted by: Benson | December 22, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

"...he died after injecting himself with ground-up prescription drugs in solution — nothing to do with 9/11 at all."

How does Derbyshire know? He is a bomb throwing polemicist who once said he hated Chelsea Clinton. He hated a 20 year old, simply because she was the spawn of Bill and Hillary. Go on and keep reading a venomous hack like this. I was wondering where you received your marching orders.
I know it's impossible, given your lack of brain cells, but try to do better than quoting someone who castigates a dead man.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 22, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

@NovaHockey wrote:
"Actually, it would have been better had the responders said "wait a minute." As an EMT, I've been taught to wait until the the building is deemed secure or the tech rescue guys have made their assessment."
.
You do realize that the Bush EPA ruled that the scene *was* safe right?

Posted by: rpixley220 | December 22, 2010 1:33 PM | Report abuse

It is only primary coverage if a person has no other coverage. If a person does and has a copay, or if their insurance company determines properly that it does not have to pay all or any part of the cost of care for good reason, then the policy that does pay is called secondary coverage, or a variety of other names. An umbrella policy, or AFLAC, for example, does not become "primary" just because it has to pay a claim. But none of that matters.

The point of the bill is as I said, to pay for health monitoring and treatment services that are determined to be the result of being in and around the disaster's various sites that have no fee basis other than the person's wallet.

If you don't think that is ok, just say so. But that is what this bill is for.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

"SERIOUS QUESTION"

from someone who isn't capable of one...

the bill is paid for by closing tax loopholes for foreign corporations. that's the sticking point... foreign corporations are more important to republicans than ordinary americans.

Posted by: fiona5 | December 22, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

Rozinante2 and shrink2, for what it's worth, I am not a "first responder" but I did volunteer with my church group -- from a place far away from NYC -- for a week in NYC after 9/11 (so even I would qualify under this bill). I can therefore testify that not everyone's health who lived through that was adversely impacted. So, please do not assume that those of us who strictly follow the U.S. Constitution don't empathize with other people. Some of us simply have legitimate policy disagreements.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

"GET RID OF THE EPA!"

GET RID OF CLAWRENCE12!

Enough is Enough!

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 22, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Wait a minute (popular phrase today)!

I thought this wasn't about the money. Wasn't it about the principle?

Now, we find out it's about the money.

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | December 22, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

@All:
Just to remind/inform that Tom Colburn is a pompous liar:
He has claimed that this bill never went through a committee, was never debated and was written at the last minute. Video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k8DuWfLFu0
.
From http://thinkprogress.org/2010/12/21/coburn-block-911/:
.
"Despite Coburn’s claim, the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions committee did in fact hold a hearing on the bill in June — and Coburn should know as he sits on that committee. "
.
Link 1 http://help.senate.gov/hearings/hearing/?id=6136100d-5056-9502-5d04-a183825e9a8b
.
Link 2 http://gillibrand.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/?id=acf8291d-6422-453b-8768-9a93296781af
.
Link 3 http://coburn.senate.gov/public/?p=CommitteeAssignments
.
He chose not to attend that hearing. And now he's complaining and showing that he is woefully misinformed at best and a liar at worst.

Posted by: rpixley220 | December 22, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

So, please do not assume that those of us who strictly follow the U.S. Constitution don't empathize with other people. Some of us simply have legitimate policy disagreements.
----------------------------------------------------------
Claw is trying to tell us the principle behind his objection. Somewhere in the Constitution it says "Enough is Enough". Don't help those 9/11 responders.

Now, Coburn obviously thinks its all about the money, because that's what he negotiates.

Coburn, the RINO.

If this goes through on unanimous consent, every GOP senator is a RINO.

Bwahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: 12BarBluesAgain | December 22, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

"So the 9/11 responders have only themselves to blame? Is that what you mean?"

What I'm saying is that if something like that were to happen again, nobody is going into the building until they're confident they can work the situation safely -- not risk free of course. Doesn't matter how many people need help or how dire their situation is.

Someone threw out the "they'll wait" comment, and I'm just pointing out that yes, that is exactly what they'll do. And they'll do that in no small part because of what happened 9/11. I'm not blaming them, but departments have reviewed what happened, what commands were/were not given, and what lessons can be learned. one of those lessons was in fact "wait a minute"

From a response standpoint, 9/11 was an unmitigated disaster. Crews showed up on scene, didn't check in with the command center, didn't have the right communications equipment, couldn't coordinate with the police, evacuation orders went unheard, etc. They were operating blind -- and it resulted in number of deaths. But blame lies solely with the 19 men who hijacked the planes.


Posted by: NoVAHockey | December 22, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

"so even I would qualify under this bill"

No you wouldn't. I knew you didn't read the bill.
Republicans see their "news" source and their leaders lie for a living and so they think everyone does.

"not everyone's health who lived through that was adversely impacted"

Everyone knows that. So was that supposed to be funny. Are you all of a sudden worried about healthy people looting this bill? Republicans hate the idea of anyone other than rich people benefiting from legislation. Legislation is to protect the upward mobility of rich people, that is why we have a government. Justice? Go ask someone who cares.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

$6.2 BILLION WOW 1 1/2 weeks in Iraq.

This is a good example of how republicans plan on treating our wounded veterans.

Posted by: knjincvc | December 22, 2010 1:57 PM | Report abuse

shrink2, I have read the bill and would qualify for an "initial health evaluation under Section 3321, even though I won't be taking it.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

"It actually looks like a pretty good bill, now that some limits have been put into it, and assuming the costs are covered."

Sure.

"I fail to understand why 90% of the coverage about this covers the politics, but not what's in the bill itself."

No worries, no one does. But if you do come to understand why, you should publish and you will be remembered in the history of ideas with the likes of Plato, Nietzsche, Freud and Hegel.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

"I have read the bill and would qualify for an "initial health evaluation under Section 3321, even though I won't be taking it."

That's the beauty of free choice. You decide for yourself. Others can decide for themselves whether skipping the evaluation is worth the risk.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 22, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

All, good stuff from Adam Serwer explaining Obama's indefinite detention policy:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/obama_embraces_indefinite_dete.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | December 22, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

thank you for proving my point:
=====================
How does Derbyshire know? He is a bomb throwing polemicist who once said he hated Chelsea Clinton. He hated a 20 year old, simply because she was the spawn of Bill and Hillary. Go on and keep reading a venomous hack like this. I was wondering where you received your marching orders.
I know it's impossible, given your lack of brain cells, but try to do better than quoting someone who castigates a dead man.

============================

Name calling is just all you have. that's it. So by all means, carry on.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 22, 2010 2:04 PM | Report abuse

"From a response standpoint, 9/11 was an unmitigated disaster. Crews showed up on scene, didn't check in with the command center, didn't have the right communications equipment, couldn't coordinate with the police, evacuation orders went unheard, etc. They were operating blind -- and it resulted in number of deaths."

And of course, that was all due to the 'leadership' of Guiliani, who really hadn't wanted to be called out of his secret love nest with his 3rd mistress.

Posted by: fiona5 | December 22, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

bsimon, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

You commenters are disgusting. How dare you call Coburn a creep! He's on of the few members of Congress willing to question what the Democrats are doing! The American people voted on November 2 for OVERSIGHT - but oh, now that it's all about New York, all bets are off. No one said anything about not wanting to help the 9/11 responders, but we're sick and tired of billions of dollars being spent with no questions asked. Oh, but it's all about New York and the East Coast and all those terrible FLYOVER people just don't understand. You people are DISGUSTING!!! There are millions and millions of us in the center of the country hurting, too, but it's all about New York and the East Coast.

Posted by: georges2 | December 22, 2010 2:18 PM | Report abuse

One thing that characterizes a winger is the need to beat a dead horse, and the time to do it

The 'lunch' is not free -- it is paid for by closing a tax loophole on foreign corporations. How many times does that have to be repeated?

Clearly, all that matters to you is that the interests of CEOs comes before regular people.

Posted by: fiona5 | December 22, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Oh goody, here we go. I'm not going to miss out this time. I heard the Democrats are going to give anyone who passed through New York back then a free pony and a free lunch together with a handout and a bailout. Wait...what? Really? That was just for bankers? All we get is this stupid blood pressure screening and somebody listening to our breathing after we fill out a checklist? That's it? I can get that anywhere already at a health fair. It is true, there is no such thing as a free lunch, but there sure are a lot of free health screenings. People should use them more often.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

How amazing that you could read the minds of all 'the American people' and tell us what they voted for!

Posted by: fiona5 | December 22, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

earth calling george -- 9/11 happened in New York.

Posted by: fiona5 | December 22, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

"You people are DISGUSTING!!!"

georges, for free I am going to tell you your blood pressure is too high. Really don't pay me, don't even thank me, it is my free gift to you.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

fiona5, closing that "tax loophole" will be passed along to consumers. As I said, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

"all those terrible FLYOVER people just don't understand"

Oh, they understand quite well. They just don't care.

"Name calling is just all you have. that's it. So by all means, carry on."

As for this character, I suggest he spend his time and energy getting his state legislature to stop accepting federal funds what so ever. Good luck with that.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 22, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

filmnoia, did you read my 1:40 PM post?

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

The cost of the obscene lifestyles of rich people (don't bother, yes including John Kerry and George Soros) is passed along to consumers. Wait, doesn't everything consumed (even clean air and water) have a cost passed on to consumers? Sheer Genius!

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

"bsimon, there's no such thing as a free lunch."

You oughta write that down, its kindof catchy.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 22, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

@typical right wing comedian this time named georges2: "You people are DISGUSTING!!! There are millions and millions of us in the center of the country hurting, too, but it's all about New York and the East Coast."

Yeah, you people are DISGUSTING.

Screw 9/11 responders and survivors... Georges2 wants him some Big Government largess for doing nothing but sitting on his fat arse being ignorant. Harumph.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 22, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

So, you agree then that there's no such thing as a free lunch? How much will it cost to set up the nationwide network of health care providers under Section 3313?

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

For those of you asking what is wrong with people in Oklahoma, just see georges2 2:18PM. This state is chock full of georges2 clones, and they LOVE Coburn. I fear we will be inflicting him on the rest of the country for some time.

Posted by: okiegirl | December 22, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Bin Laden is laughing his butt off.

Posted by: danw1 | December 22, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"How much will it cost to set up the nationwide network of health care providers under Section 3313?"

Why would you ask me? You've made your point that you think its bad policy. Fine, I understand. I also disagree. But I want to clarify for you that if you think I'm interested in trying to change your mind, you're mistaken.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 22, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

"fiona5, closing that "tax loophole" will be passed along to consumers. As I said, there's no such thing as a free lunch. "

I don't give a sh*t. Why should a foreign corporation get special treatment, and receive a tax break american companies don't get? It's absurd on the face of it.

Posted by: fiona5 | December 22, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

shrink2, I asked you two questions at 2:43 PM.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

clawrence said

"...do not assume that those of us who strictly follow the U.S. Constitution don't empathize with other people."

First, the Constitution in a way is like the Bible, open to interpretation. It's not immutable. It's a living document, used by succeeding generations to interpret by legal professionals to suit existing circumstances.

It's great that you and your church group volunteered in NYC after 911. I constantly hear a drumbeat of criticism about Eastern elites and SF snobs as a form of reverse snobbism. I don't see people from either coast refer to others as hicks and rednecks as much I see the reverse. Time after time I've heard the moaning from people complaining that their federal tax dollars are helping people who have suffered through a natural disaster by saying "Well they chose to live there." There is really very little sense in this country that we are all in this together. You can thank Fox and right wing radio for creating that type of division.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 22, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

"Bin Laden is laughing his butt off."

Hey, if he thinks Republicans were not serious about juice, oh whoops I meant fiscal responsibility, he can laugh all he wants.

Free health screenings...what will they give away next, little booklets about how to prepare your family to survive a nuclear attack? Paper isn't free you know.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Clawrence12:
Thank you for what you did! And if you were hurt doing that, and if there isn't another way to get you help, I'm glad you'd be able to get help from this bill.

That would be the best use of my tax dollars I can think of.

Posted by: Rozinante2 | December 22, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Hey claw, how is your free war going?
Can I send you a list of all the stuff Republicans have given away at the expense of working people and ask you whether it was free? Stop it. Everyone knows nothing of value is free, did you think you were onto something there?

If you think something is worth having, you pay for it with something else. The relative values of the exchange are debatable. There, we agree.

"You can thank Fox and right wing radio for creating that type of division." Don't forget the party they serve. Republicans made a strategic decision to prevent Obama's (sure, wholly naïve but that is another topic) plan to bring the country together by mobilizing the bigots at its political base. That was easy.


Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Well, it seems the lame-duck session is about over, with victories on START and the responders bill. Now the real question is what next.

Clearly not much will happen legislatively. The Dems in the Senate can block the wingnut bills from the Repub house. Obama will have to turn to executive work. I wonder if the Senate Dems can get judicial nominees through. I hope they really work hard on this, hammering the Repubs for up-or-down votes. I mean, clearly they will have the time since there won't be much in the way of a Dem legislative agenda now that the house will be Repub.

What do people think?

Posted by: michiganmaine | December 22, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Rozinante2, that's my whole argument. Because I can think of much better uses of your tax dollars. Target the workers comp boards for unfairly denying claims, exhaust all other legitimate means, but don't do this.

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 22, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Conspicuosly silent, George Walker Bush.

Posted by: whocares666 | December 22, 2010 3:32 PM | Report abuse

George: "You commenters are disgusting. How dare you call Coburn a creep! He's on of the few members of Congress willing to question what the Democrats are doing! The American people voted on November 2 for OVERSIGHT - but oh, now that it's all about New York, all bets are off. No one said anything about not wanting to help the 9/11 responders, but we're sick and tired of billions of dollars being spent with no questions asked. "

Ummm.... "no questions asked"???? The bill was introduced 7 years ago and had 22 committee hearing in the house alone. There were a lot of questions asked and answered.

Posted by: michiganmaine | December 22, 2010 3:40 PM | Report abuse

So glad that all that silly stuff about the START Treaty, Repealing DADT, and providing care for 9/11 First Responders is out of the way.

Now the Main Stream TV Media can devote 100% of their time, instead of their usual 90% of their time, to keeping us informed, at all times, about every time Lindsey Lohan or any member of the British Royal Parasites, passes gas.

How are the people in the camps, in Haiti and Darfur doing? What is happening inside Burma? Have all the Christians been driven out of George Bush's post invasion Iraqi Paradise?

Never mind, says The Main Stream Mediaocrity: let us tell you about Loco Lohan, and The Royal engagements.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 22, 2010 3:45 PM | Report abuse

"What do people think? "

For the next two years Obama and the Dems better take some lessons on how to play defense from the 1985 Bears or those great Steeler teams of the 70s. Just as the GOP has played NO, NO, NO, for the last two years, Obama and perhaps a guy like Anthony Weiner, should have their Wingnut of the Week Award they give out to the most off the wall GOP statement of the week. The House is going to be so full of whack jobs, that deciding who to give the award to will be difficult. Many of them will make Jan Brewer look like Hillary Clinton. Stand up and ridicule the most outrageous member of the GOP before the public week after week. Create the type of constant drumbeat that the Right Wing does now. It will filter down to those middle of the road low information voters come Nov. 2012.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 22, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Defense? So that was it? Da Bears? What are we supposed to do, pressure and sack quarterback Böhner? If Democrats think they are on defense with the White House and the Senate then the terrorists have won.

I think Democrats like to be weak, I really do; they think it is a virtue. Republicans know that. Democrats are afraid of a vulgar display of power. Hey Democrats, when Jesus proclaimed, "The meek shall inherit the earth," He wasn't talking about your political party.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

so basically the liberal argument for this spending amounts to two tired old saws:

they hated the war in Iraq and since it cost money they now have the right to waste as much money as they please.

Or

The rich people live better than the rest of us therefore we have the right to waste as much money as we please.

I like what I see in the compromise and it is my expectation that every bill which spends our money recieve the same tough process.

Now we return you to today's episode of "liberal undies in a wad squad" Starring Ethan et al.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 22, 2010 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Seems like to me that the final bill was a pretty good one, and eliminated some problems with prior versions.

I guess I'm saying it was worth delaying it in order to get a better bill.

I think it's better for congress to read the bills, discuss them, and amend them to make them better than to look at them simplistically, like the Jon Stewart review last week.

There were actually some problems and loopholes in the earlier versions of the bill, and the final bill absolutely seems like the best version.

Posted by: Benson | December 22, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

"There were actually some problems and loopholes in the earlier versions of the bill, and the final bill absolutely seems like the best version."

I agree and there still are some problems and loopholes in it. Its budget will be looted by more than a few people, no doubt.

Rick Scott (R) could have gotten on that project if he hadn't bought himself a job in Florida with the proceeds of his last criminal enterprise. Well, I suppose since he didn't go to jail, it was all ok, in fact, since he didn't go to jail, he earned it and since he earned it, it was all due to hard work and innovation, he is an American hero and a job creator, an entrepreneur at taxpayer expense.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Wow, looks like all the Conservatives independently came together on this issue as well. It's amazing how they all arrive on these Conservative Things independently.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 22, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Remember each one does primary source research, struggles mightily with the grey areas and the ethical problems...then arrives at the exact same conclusion expressed in an eerily vague way, all at the same time. Intellectualsyncret I'm sure I can develop a neologism to describe it. Wish I had a TV.

BTW, back in the stone age, the OR lounge didn't have Fox on TV, it had a little pile of Wall Street Journals in the morning, for the anesthesiologists, each with his own subscription.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 22, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse


The first new rule says you HAVE to have insurance. Both my husband and I have pre-existing conditions, and although the new bill says we can't be denied coverage because of it. So far, the cheapest health insurance we've been able to find is called "Wise Health Insurance" search for it online if you are pre-existing conditions.

Posted by: daleleblanc | December 23, 2010 1:28 AM | Report abuse

DDAWD, I still oppose the bill (so we Conservatives didn't "all" come together on this issue either). Why am even I covered under this new entitlement program, as I posted above, for simply spending five days in Manhattan?

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 23, 2010 8:07 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company