Ian WhiteRepublicans Stand Up to 9/11 Rescue Workers
December 14th 2010 14:59
Category: No Category
We have an interesting political system in America. We place our well being in the hands of rich, out of touch, old people who are more concerned with reelection than actually doing anything once they get elected. Men and women who predominantly must pledge allegiance to the faceless corporations that fund their attack ads instead of the flag they merely end up using as a prop. So the passing of bills usually goes like this in case you haven't been following. The Democrats propose something, the Republicans oppose it, the Democrats halfheartedly argue before diluting the bill to a waste of paper, and then it eventually passes. Or a bill is flat out shut down in order to prioritize a more self-serving proposition.
Thus, the stage has been set for our current lame duck session, which has actually been going on since 1776. As the Democrats prepare to be unceremoniously booted out of office, they decide now is the time to attempt to get anything done. Because, you guessed it, while they had the majority they were concerned with reelection and subsequently couldn't risk doing their job. One of the initiatives currently on the table is the Zadroga Bill. It was named after New York City Police Officer James Zadroga, who is credited as being the first person to die as a direct result of being exposed to the toxic air while pulling people from rubble on 9/11. Now you may be thinking, "wait a minute, the republicans have been wearing 9/11 on their sleeves since it happened, this bill should pass with flying colors." Well you'd be wrong. You see they certainly used 9/11, but I mean the term 'used' in the most derogatory sense imaginable. They exploit it to get votes, plain and simple.
Republicans have been stunningly absent in the public discussion of the Zadroga Bill. We finally got a response from one Mike Enzi, representative of Wyoming, but not on camera. He wrote up an op-ed explaining the GOP's opposition:
Enzi said "Congress has funded numerous programs to provide care and compensation to 9/11 victims, spending several billion dollars on extraordinary and unprecedented efforts."
And we were against them every step of the way
"Current program administrators have failed to account for much of the previously allocated money."
By that I mean nothing was allocated to my wallet
"would like to work with the sponsors of this
legislation to try to resolve these concerns"
Don't call us, we'll call you
"Before we create a new program, we need the basic facts about what worked and what did not work over the past nine years."
So I can pretend to read them
Enzi alleges that Republicans strongly support "the 9/11 heroes" but have "concerns about waste, fraud and abuse in the existing programs."
Enzi specifically calls out the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health for botching the 9/11 worker's healthcare, and said that Congress could not be spending money on questionable programs, and concluded his ode to blanket talking points by saying a "flawed bill" should not be rushed through Congress in lame duck.
Mike Enzi sounds really responsible about the way we spend money doesn't he? He's principled and fiscal even in the face of justifiable outrage. Regardless of his belief in a bill, he won't do it if it ain't right!
Right?
May 2003: The Pentagon can't account for almost 15 billion dollars in the Iraq reconstruction effort.
Mike Enzi's response: "This bill isn't perfect. The fact remains, however, that we need to fund our troops...So I will support the supplemental bill."
Yup, principled and fiscal.
Could it be that he knew where all that 'lost' money was going?
Well he claims to support the bill's intention, so how about a debate?
Oh wait, the republicans voted to suspend all debate in the senate this week. Never mind then.
Yes it's been quite a struggle for those affected by 9/11. 5 days after the attack, Christine Todd Whitman, the chief of the EPA under the Bush regime claimed that the air was safe to breath. Well the freedom of information act lawsuit yielded the documents of the EPA's actual investigation and we discovered that outside of her imagination, the air was toxic for weeks after 9/11.
In regards to not knowing where the money is going, there is a detailed account readily available to the Republican opponents showing how the 475 million for 9/11 victims since 2001 was spent. Enzi's complaint is that the 9/11 programs haven't provided him with information on individual health care claims, which is the kind of data a health insurance company would have.
Why don't we have that information?
The programs would have needed to be run as a health insurance plan, and since it's not, the information doesn't exist.
Why wasn't it run as a health insurance plan?
Because the Bush administration chose to set up the healthcare compensation for the responders through a system of block grants and clinics.
Welcome to the world of politics. We're in a two party system where one party has just refused to even discuss any bills until the Bush tax cut issue prevents the wealthiest 2 percent from having a marginal tax increase. They also refused to do anything while they were the minority, but I suppose that's beside the point. The other party only attempts to pass something when they've been booted out and thus know they'll be blockaded. But cosmetically they're trying. Brownie points.
Remember this the next time you line up to once again pull the lever on "change" or "bipartisanship."
Full story
Thus, the stage has been set for our current lame duck session, which has actually been going on since 1776. As the Democrats prepare to be unceremoniously booted out of office, they decide now is the time to attempt to get anything done. Because, you guessed it, while they had the majority they were concerned with reelection and subsequently couldn't risk doing their job. One of the initiatives currently on the table is the Zadroga Bill. It was named after New York City Police Officer James Zadroga, who is credited as being the first person to die as a direct result of being exposed to the toxic air while pulling people from rubble on 9/11. Now you may be thinking, "wait a minute, the republicans have been wearing 9/11 on their sleeves since it happened, this bill should pass with flying colors." Well you'd be wrong. You see they certainly used 9/11, but I mean the term 'used' in the most derogatory sense imaginable. They exploit it to get votes, plain and simple.
Republicans have been stunningly absent in the public discussion of the Zadroga Bill. We finally got a response from one Mike Enzi, representative of Wyoming, but not on camera. He wrote up an op-ed explaining the GOP's opposition:
Enzi said "Congress has funded numerous programs to provide care and compensation to 9/11 victims, spending several billion dollars on extraordinary and unprecedented efforts."
And we were against them every step of the way
"Current program administrators have failed to account for much of the previously allocated money."
By that I mean nothing was allocated to my wallet
"would like to work with the sponsors of this
legislation to try to resolve these concerns"
Don't call us, we'll call you
"Before we create a new program, we need the basic facts about what worked and what did not work over the past nine years."
So I can pretend to read them
Enzi alleges that Republicans strongly support "the 9/11 heroes" but have "concerns about waste, fraud and abuse in the existing programs."
Enzi specifically calls out the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health for botching the 9/11 worker's healthcare, and said that Congress could not be spending money on questionable programs, and concluded his ode to blanket talking points by saying a "flawed bill" should not be rushed through Congress in lame duck.
Mike Enzi sounds really responsible about the way we spend money doesn't he? He's principled and fiscal even in the face of justifiable outrage. Regardless of his belief in a bill, he won't do it if it ain't right!
Right?
May 2003: The Pentagon can't account for almost 15 billion dollars in the Iraq reconstruction effort.
Mike Enzi's response: "This bill isn't perfect. The fact remains, however, that we need to fund our troops...So I will support the supplemental bill."
Yup, principled and fiscal.
Could it be that he knew where all that 'lost' money was going?
Well he claims to support the bill's intention, so how about a debate?
Oh wait, the republicans voted to suspend all debate in the senate this week. Never mind then.
Yes it's been quite a struggle for those affected by 9/11. 5 days after the attack, Christine Todd Whitman, the chief of the EPA under the Bush regime claimed that the air was safe to breath. Well the freedom of information act lawsuit yielded the documents of the EPA's actual investigation and we discovered that outside of her imagination, the air was toxic for weeks after 9/11.
In regards to not knowing where the money is going, there is a detailed account readily available to the Republican opponents showing how the 475 million for 9/11 victims since 2001 was spent. Enzi's complaint is that the 9/11 programs haven't provided him with information on individual health care claims, which is the kind of data a health insurance company would have.
Why don't we have that information?
The programs would have needed to be run as a health insurance plan, and since it's not, the information doesn't exist.
Why wasn't it run as a health insurance plan?
Because the Bush administration chose to set up the healthcare compensation for the responders through a system of block grants and clinics.
Welcome to the world of politics. We're in a two party system where one party has just refused to even discuss any bills until the Bush tax cut issue prevents the wealthiest 2 percent from having a marginal tax increase. They also refused to do anything while they were the minority, but I suppose that's beside the point. The other party only attempts to pass something when they've been booted out and thus know they'll be blockaded. But cosmetically they're trying. Brownie points.
Remember this the next time you line up to once again pull the lever on "change" or "bipartisanship."
Full story
| 65 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
