Metro Jacksonville

From my Megavote mailing in my inbox today:

QuoteRecent House Votes
Fire Grants Reauthorization Act of 2009 - Vote Passed (395-31, 8 Not Voting)

The House approved this legislation that would reauthorize FEMA’s Assistance to Firefighters grants and Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response program through FY2014. The bill now goes to the Senate.

Rep. John Mica voted NO......send e-mail or see bio


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act of 2009 - Vote Passed (243-183, 8 Not Voting)

The House passed this bill to change the formula that determines the Medicare physician fee schedule, with the intention of preventing a 21 percent reduction in Medicare payments to physicians. It now goes to the Senate.

Rep. John Mica voted NO......send e-mail or see bio

Do we support Firefighters? YES
Do we support Doctors? YES

Why the NO votes in our name?

Check out YOUR Representatives' votes at http://www.congress.org

simple...

Mica is a Republican.  Republicans care more about money than the welfare of people.

QuoteWhy the NO votes in our name?

Faye...  What?  You dont know the answer?  Im sure it is because he hates firefighters and doctors... ::) Duh.

There cannot be any other explanation... :o

Quote from: Reaper man on November 25, 2009, 11:24:35 PM
simple...

Mica is a Republican.  Republicans care more about money than the welfare of people.

Quite true in most cases!

Of course none of this matters to people like BT,...........he doesn't really care why Mica votes the way he does, as long as Mica's a Republican.

Thanks Stephen.  Faye... Perhaps the issue is deeper than...

QuoteDo we support Firefighters? YES
Do we support Doctors? YES

Even you... Faye... would agree that Mica supports fire fighters and doctors... The point... Faye... is perhaps there is something else besides the support of these to groups which causes Mica and others to not support the bill. 

Same with the healthcare reform bill.  It is huge and complex.  I am sure there are many parts of the bill that republicans could and do support.  They simply will not vote for it because of the rather large portions that they do not support.

Your simplistic slogans are just that Faye... simplistic.

Republicans in fact DO support...
Doctors...
Firefighters...
and healthcare reform.

Quote from: stephendare on November 27, 2009, 12:00:52 PM
Faye, I think BT can more than adequately describe his own motivations.  I have yet to find him to be a partisan fanatic, and instead one of the more open minded conservative people who posts here.

I would believe that if I actually ever saw him question Mica's votes. Instead, whatever Mica votes is ok with him: "Mica must have good reasons for doing so."

Can you say blind trust?

All I know is that when I ran against Mica in 2008, I received communications from Republican doctors who were perturbed at Mica, as they had done fundraisers for Mica in the past, and felt betrayed when Mica decided to back insurance companies over doctors by cutting Medicare doctor's reimbursements.

I brought it up in my debate against Mica:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5ylBIS5x6Q

Quote from: FayeforCure on November 27, 2009, 05:21:19 PM

Quote from: stephendare on November 27, 2009, 12:00:52 PM
Faye, I think BT can more than adequately describe his own motivations.  I have yet to find him to be a partisan fanatic, and instead one of the more open minded conservative people who posts here.

I would believe that if I actually ever saw him question Mica's votes. Instead, whatever Mica votes is ok with him: "Mica must have good reasons for doing so."

Can you say blind trust?

All I know is that when I ran against Mica in 2008, I received communications from Republican doctors who were perturbed at Mica, as they had done fundraisers for Mica in the past, and felt betrayed when Mica decided to back insurance companies over doctors by cutting Medicare doctor's reimbursements.

I brought it up in my debate against Mica:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5ylBIS5x6Q

It sounds like we agree that Doctors are paid too little for treating Medicare beneficiaries.

 :D ::) :D  Actually Faye...

I am not so much FOR him as I am against you... :) :-*

Quote from: buckethead on November 27, 2009, 05:35:59 PM
It sounds like we agree that Doctors are paid too little for treating Medicare beneficiaries.

buckethead, thank you!

And Mica wants that pay to be cut another 21%. Go figure!!

Despite Mica's deplorable vote, the 21% Medicare cuts for physician reimbirsement won't happen. Enough true REPRESENTATIVES averted the cuts.

Quote from: BridgeTroll on November 27, 2009, 06:07:26 PM
:D ::) :D  Actually Faye...

I am not so much FOR him as I am against you... :) :-*

AMEN BROTHER TROLL! AMEN!
The last politician that spread this much hate got convicted at the Geneva War Crimes Trial.

OCKLAWAHA

Faye...to spin this another way....has Mica ever voted for something you are in favor of?

Here are the probable reasons for voting against Fire Grants Reauthorization Act of 2009

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HomelandSecurity/wm2657.cfm

QuoteH.R. 3791 reauthorizes a grant program that has significant shortcomings:

•It continues a grant program that has failed to reduce fire-related deaths and injuries of firefighters and civilians.
•It is specifically designed to encourage local fire departments to become increasingly dependent on federal funding.
•As currently drafted, the legislation fails to reorient the fire grants toward fulfilling a federal homeland security function. Instead, fire grants will continue being almost solely focused on subsidizing the routine operations of basic fire services.

Reasons for voting against Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act of 2009...

http://www.gop.gov/bill/111/1/hr3961

QuoteWhile Democrats claim Speaker Pelosi's 1,990-page health "reform" bill (H.R. 3962) is "deficit-neutral," the hundreds of billions of dollars in new spending in H.R. 3961 is not paid for.  While Members may support reform  of the SGR mechanism, many may oppose what amounts to an obvious attempt to hide the apparent cost of health "reform" by introducing separate legislation to repeal the SGR mechanism without paying for this more than $200 billion increase in federal spending in its first ten years.  Moreover, H.R. 3961 would permanently alter the SGR mechanism, and an independent analysis of official data conducted by former Medicare public trustee Tom Saving found that a permanent reversal of these current-law reductions, if not paid for by appropriate offsets in spending, would increase Medicare's unfunded obligations by nearly $2 trillion over a 75-year period.  Due to these significant concerns about rising deficits and higher federal spending, a bipartisan majority in the Senate recently rejected similar legislation (S. 1776) designed to increase physician payments over the next 10 years that did not include any offsetting spending reductions.

Now you done it!

 :D  No doubt! :D  The point is there are rational reasons for opposing legislation even if you agree to the general principal of the legislation.  Both Acts clearly have legitimate and good points and when looked at all by themselves seem perfectly benign and helpful.  Both also have shortcomings.  Many times legislators vote against bills that they could or would ultimately support but for those shortcomings.  I... myself would have wanted Mica to vote for the Medicare act but understand why he did not.  That act... by itself... and in a vacume... is very supportable.  Put in context with the huge and complex "healthcare reform bill"  it becomes another unfunded mandate.

Fayes... "republicans hate firefighters and doctors" rhetoric is emotional and irrational.

Quote from: tufsu1 on November 27, 2009, 08:40:08 PM
Faye...to spin this another way....has Mica ever voted for something you are in favor of?

Sure tufsu1, thanks for asking.

Back in 1999, Mica voted against the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act that allowed banks to sell stock and investments. Since 1933, safeguards had been put in place to prevent banks from combining bank operations with investment. These two activities had been kept separate to prevent another economic collapse and depression.

Mica was right to vote NO on the repeal of the Glass-Stegall act.

Recently Mica also recognized the fire hazard of lithium batteries in airtravel.

So, I am certainly able and willing to see reasonable votes from people who have a terrible voting record overall.

Unlike some of the heated rhetoric of the tea drinkers who as I do, believe government is corrupted,......I do not believe we need to do away with government altogether, we just need to make it work better.

That includes having government provide the oversight and accountability that would address the 21% fraud in Medicare, rather than cut physician pay by 21%.

Only 31 congressmen voted against the Firemen, including John Mica!!

QuoteHouse Passes Legislation Improving FIRE Act/SAFER Grant Programs 

November 18, 2009 â€" By a bipartisan vote of 395-31, on November 18, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 3791, the FIRE Grants Reauthorization Act of 2009. The bill makes improvements to both the Assistance to Fire Fighters (FIRE Act) and Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grant programs that will significantly benefit professional fire departments in the United States.

The House also adopted the Firefighter Fatality Reduction Act as an amendment to H.R. 3791. The amendment, offered by Representative Ed Permutter (D-CO) promotes fire department compliance with industry consensus standards -- a top IAFF priority. The amendment passed by a vote of 358-75.

“Reauthorizing the FIRE Act and SAFER and enacting the Perlmutter amendment are of critical importance to protecting the health and safety of IAFF members,” says IAFF General President Harold Schaitberger. “Passing both through the House brings us one step closer to ensuring our nation’s professional fire departments have the tools and support they need to protect public safety.”

H.R. 3791 would make important changes to the way FIRE Act grants are awarded to the benefit of professional fire departments. Specifically, the bill would significantly increase the amount of funding for which larger departments may apply, and reduce the local match from 20 percent to 10 percent. The proposal also allows the match to be waived for communities facing financial hardship, and eliminates the local match entirely for departments applying for a fire prevention grant.

Perhaps most importantly, the bill also guarantees professional and combination fire departments a minimum percentage of funding under the FIRE Act. To date, professional departments have enjoyed no such guarantee and have been significantly shortchanged in FIRE Act grants awards.

The bill also simplifies the rules governing SAFER, making it significantly easier for municipalities to commit to a SAFER grant. Amendments include shortening the grant period from five to three years, implementing an across-the-board 20 percent local match, and eliminating the current funding cap. It also makes permanent the temporary authorities enacted by the IAFF to waive the SAFER local match and other restrictions.

The U.S. Senate is currently working to craft companion legislation, which it is expected to consider before the new year.

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives who did not support the IAFF and the nation's fire fighters in this vote are:

Todd Akin (R-MO)
Rob Bishop (R-UT)
Paul Broun (R-GA)
John Campbell (R-CA)
John Carter (R-TX)
Jason Chaffetz (R-UT)
Mike Coffman (R-CO)
Mike Conaway (R-TX)
John Culberson (R-TX)
Jeff Flake (R-AZ)
Trent Franks (R-AZ)
Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)
Wally Herger (R-CA)
Bob Inglis (R-SC)
Darrell Issa (R-CA)
Sam Johnson (R-TX)
Jim Jordan (R-OH)
Steve King (R-IA)
Jack Kingston (R-GA)
Doug Lamborn (R-CO)
John Linder (R-GA)
Cynthia Lummis (R-WY)
Connie Mack (R-FL)
Tom McClintock (R-CA)
John Mica (R-FL)
Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)
Ron Paul (R-TX)
Ed Royce (R-CA)
James F. Sensenbrenner (R-WI)
John Shadegg (R-AZ)
William Thornberry (R-TX)

http://www.iaff.org/09News/111809FIRE_SAFER.htm

I had hoped you would be a fiesty and well informed leftist democrat, but you are looking more and more like a simple demogogue. You are better than this Faye.

So fay? You and Mica AGAIN, God, same old SHIT different day I guess... Someone needs to hit the delete key, I think we're all sick of this, even those who agree! Even if you keep up the hate attack, I would like to see you write something of your own for a change... There are only so many pages in the newspapers.

BTW, YES it does represent me, but you knew that.

OCKLAWAHA

Quote from: FayeforCure on November 29, 2009, 07:10:13 PM
Only 31 congressmen voted against the Firemen, including John Mica!!

Notice how all 31 of those were republicans. *shakes head*

Fayes goal is to make every single one of you dependent on the federal government.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/HomelandSecurity/wm2657.cfm

H.R. 3791 reauthorizes a grant program that has significant shortcomings:

•It continues a grant program that has failed to reduce fire-related deaths and injuries of firefighters and civilians.
•It is specifically designed to encourage local fire departments to become increasingly dependent on federal funding.
•As currently drafted, the legislation fails to reorient the fire grants toward fulfilling a federal homeland security function. Instead, fire grants will continue being almost solely focused on subsidizing the routine operations of basic fire services.