Estimate: GOP?s symbolic reading of Constitution to cost taxpayers $1.1 million
 

What a fucking farce!

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/r...-constitution/

good to see the principles that america was founded upon being taken seriously again.

better than the democrats reading from the communist manifesto.

I hope that was sarcasm.

So when they get to the 14th amendment are they going to add a part about illegals?

Democrats agreed to read it and they are alternating doing the reading right now...so if the Democrats agreed to it and are also reading it dose that not also make them part of the problem?

Absolutely - ALL of the shit-stains in Washington are guilty for wasting taxpayer time and money on this theatrical stupidity!

They should have hired a speed reader like they did when the jerks wanted the entire health care reform bill read aloud. Or whatever the hell that nonsense was.

what, no fireworks?

Some people will find a way to make them look bad no matter what?

It doesn't cost any more, it's based on their salaries!

So you're against the constitution, OK, making a record of that. It should be read, the liberals are against it, takes away from what they achieved under Pelosi and the added 5.34 trillion dollars to the deficit!
But Pelosi said the Democrats are better at reducing the deficit, LMAO

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/01/06/...e-the-deficit/

So you're saying you don't like people? You hate Pepsi?

Okay, I'll make a note of that.

I prefer Coke, taste better with rum

As if any of the power mongering collectivists have a clue as to what any of the constitutional documents mean and in what context they were created... LOL

I think thats the purpose of the reading, to get back to that, we can only hope

God you are fucking reatrded. it IS costing taxpayers because they should be WORKING instead of fucking around. No one here is against the Constiution. If anyone is it's YOU if you want to be technical. You're for republicans to run everything. That's one party rule. How'd that work in the USSR and Nazi Germany?

You don't know what the Constitution means.

That's peanuts if it can stop alot of unconstitutional laws.

Money well spent!!

but the tax breaks added 1 trillion, and the GOP isn't even in power

And the healthcare bill saves trillions of dollars over time. Doesnt "kill" a single job either, unless you want to pretend it "kills" a job of an insurance claim denier. Good riddance.

Hypocrits and liars should be kicked in the nuts. All in favor? Aye.

You mean like the democrats waiting till the lame duck session to get anything done?

I want more than a two party system you dip shit!

Apparently more than you do!

They didn't add 1 trillion, they reduced money sent to the government thru taxes to cover for the 5.34 trillion dollars ran up in debt buy pelosi and her gang

even the CBO is unclear about any savings, and with the states winning in the constitutionality of being forced to pay for insurance and unions and companies getting waivers to opt out, it's really getting worse for the law

They're not unclear that it SAVES money. The amounts change but not the fact that "obamacare" saves money. So someone coming along and saying it costs money and "kills jobs" is just a liar*. IMHO.

*edit: or they're just passing on wrong information. Like a talking point.

Obamacare from what I understand saves money, on a graph, because after a couple of years the burden is passed on to the states. I could be wrong, I believe that is what I heard.

this thread is already hilarious

[The CBO report] assumes that Medicare?s sustainable growth rate mechanism, which would have reduced physician payments by 21 percent in 2010 alone, actually takes effect. Medicare reimbursement rates are legislated to decline over time but basically never do. Instead, Congress routinely enacts what's known as the "doc fix," or upward payment adjustments. As Politico reported in May, "In 2010 alone, Congress has already headed off three scheduled payment drops ? in January, March and April." In fact, as the CBO notes, Congress has kicked the can down the road on payment reductions yet again, putting off the reduction in payment rates until at least December 2010.

ObamaCare doesn't reduce medical costs under even the rosiest of scenarios (that is, projections that take seriously all its creators' assumptions). What we can be certain of is that this legislation increases the amount of money taxpayers will be forced by law to pay for health insurance to the tune of $420 billion over the next 10 years. Claims about ObamaCare?s deficit-reduction effects depend on new taxes growing even faster than new spending. Despite the persistent claims of Peter Orszag and other defenders of the president's health care legislation, ObamaCare has nothing to do with cutting costs.

http://reason.com/assets/mc/jtaylor/VeroCosts.jpg

http://reason.com/archives/2010/11/0...educe-health-c

I would say that the REAL problem is that it cost over a million dollars just to read the constitution. That's fucking unreal!

And if it costs that much just to read the constitution...how much money do these assholes waste EVERYDAY just being "in session" ?

They need to GO HOME like Congress is supposed to do and only convene when there are important matters of state the way the founding fathers meant them to do.

Fucking career politicians...they ALWAYS have to be "in session" making new "laws" to prove that they need to be there at all.

The whole thing was based on how much they make a year divided into the time they spent doing this, it's not like it cost 1.1 million extra