Friday, December 10, 2010

While Not Much Good Can Be Said about the Democrats in Congress, the Republicans in the Senate Have Just Set a New Low that May Never Be Exceeded!

Blogger's Note: Below is a graph showing the cost to the government of the Bush tax cuts (in 2008) for the richest 1% of the population. 
The "compromise" that Obama has agreed to in order to extend unemployment benefits at a cost of $33 billion is a two-year extension of these tax cuts for the top 1% amounting to at least $160 billion.  And the fear is that once they "get their foot in the door" the GOP legislators will demand a full 10 year extension worth about $1 trillion!  But in the meantime Senate Republicans are denying the sick and dying 9/11 first responders compensation costing only $7.4 billion. Remember, these were the heroes who were lied to by Bush EPA Aministrator Christy Whitman about the supposed safety of breathing the dust.
"Compassionate conservatism" ...or "height of hypocrisy"?

Shame on them all!!! If I were a Republican, I'd be informing my Senator(s) that if they don't back off on these issues, they would not have my vote the next time they're up for reelection...






Republicans Block U.S. Health Aid for 9/11 Workers


WASHINGTON — Republican senators blocked Democratic legislation on Thursday that sought to provide medical care to rescue workers and others who became ill as a result of breathing in toxic fumes, dust and smoke at the site of the World Trade Center attack in 2001.

The 9/11 health bill, a version of which was approved by the House of Representatives in September, was among several initiatives that Senate Democrats had hoped to approve before the close of the 111th Congress. Supporters believe this was their last real opportunity to have the bill passed.

The action by the Senate created huge uncertainty over the bill’s future. Its proponents were working on Thursday to salvage the legislation, with one possibility being to have it inserted into a large tax-cut bill that Republicans and Democrats are trying to pass before Congress ends its current session.

Such a move seemed unlikely, since it might complicate passage of the tax package, which includes a provision that President Obama sought in return for backing the continuation of tax cuts for all income levels that Republicans wanted: an extension of unemployment benefits.

In a vote largely along party lines, the Senate rejected a procedural move by Democrats to end debate on the 9/11 health bill and to bring it to a vote; 60 yes votes were needed, but the move received 57, with 42 votes against.

Republicans have been raising concerns about how to pay for the $7.4 billion measure, while Democrats, led by Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand of New York, have argued that there was a moral obligation to assist those who put their lives at risk during rescue and cleanup operations at ground zero.

The bill is formally known as the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, named after a New York police detective who participated in the rescue efforts at ground zero. He later developed breathing complications that were common to first responders at the site, and he died in January 2006. The cause of his death became a source of debate after the city’s medical examiner concluded that it was not directly related to the attacks.

After the vote, Representative Carolyn B. Maloney of New York, a chief sponsor of the bill in the House, argued that Democrats should include the 9/11 health bill in the larger tax-cut legislation and, in the process, dare Republicans to oppose it in that context. Ms. Maloney added that the tax bill was the one piece of legislation that “Republicans won’t leave this town without passing.”

As the day wore on, it appeared increasingly unlikely that the Senate would include a provision providing health care for ground zero workers in any tax package it brought to the floor, according to senior Capitol Hill officials. But supporters of the 9/11 legislation said there was a possibility they could persuade Democratic leaders in the House to include it in any tax-cut plan that the chamber approved and win Senate approval during negotiations over differences in measures passed by the two chambers.

The Senate action was a blow to sponsors of the bill, who mobilized a network of allies across the political spectrum to lobby on its behalf, including the New York City police commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. Ms. Gillibrand, the chief sponsor in the Senate, even reached out to former President George W. Bush. But her aides say Mr. Bush did not respond to her entreaties.

In a statement, the mayor chastised Senate Republicans for their “wrongheaded political strategy” and called on them to allow a floor vote on the bill. “The attacks of 9/11 were attacks on America,” he said, “and we have a collective responsibility to care for the heroes, from all 50 states, who answered the call of duty, saved lives and helped our nation recover.”

The bill calls for providing $3.2 billion over the next eight years to monitor and treat injuries stemming from exposure to toxic dust and debris at ground zero. New York City would pay 10 percent of those health costs.

The bill would also set aside $4.2 billion to reopen the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund to provide payments for job and economic losses.

In addition, the bill includes a provision that would allow money from the Victim Compensation Fund to be paid to any eligible claimant who receives a payment under the settlement of lawsuits that 10,000 rescue and cleanup workers recently reached with the city.

Now, those who receive a settlement from the city are limited in how much compensation they can get from the fund, according to the bill’s sponsors.

There are nearly 60,000 people enrolled in health monitoring and treatment programs related to the 9/11 attacks, according to the sponsors of the bill. The federal government provides the bulk of the money for those programs.

If the bill is not adopted by the current Congress, its supporters will have start over again next year. With Republicans set to take control of the House, passing the bill in that chamber will be extremely difficult, the bill’s supporters say. That is a large part of the reason backers of the measure were pleading with Senate leaders to get it passed by this Congress.

No comments: