# No CLASS Obama! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 15, 2011, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769 "2011-10-15T23:32:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2011, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/101 "2011-10-17T21:28:02Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Yeah, how dare they discuss, plan, and debate a piece of legislation for nearly a year, after it had been the primary focus of the preceding general election, and then pass it with a 60% supermajority! Everyone knows that the proper, responsible way to pass laws is to push for a Constitutional amendment within a week with the credit of the country held hostage. 3 years later and the truth about it comes out. This was easily one of the most important pieces of legislation moving forward and it was rushed through the process. And you seem to forget the [vote buying](http://www.civitasreview.com/healthcare/more-expensive-vote-buying-for-health-care-bill/) involved using tax payer money. ---
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2011, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/102 "2011-10-17T21:56:41Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Furthermore, I think it’s facile to say that the flaw was so simple that a 5th-grader could point it out. Now, again, I’m hardly an expert on the issue (having never even heard of CLASS before this thread), but there are plenty of extraordinarily complicated societal and sociological issues which you can look at, can make a very simple and not-totally-meaningless analogy to some fable or parable or other, and say “see, here’s why it’s going to fail”. Sometimes it will turn out that it will in fact fail. And sometimes it won’t. But very few things that involve topics as complicated as health care are really truly meaningfully analyzable via appeal to Aesop. Or to think about it another way, Democrats who proposed this law in the first place might be wrong headed or incorrect about any number of things, but they’re certainly not utter idiots. And if it took three years of economic analysis by professionals to demonstrate that the plan would in fact not be long-term self-sustaining, then I’m pretty sure that Bricker’s son’s analysis, however, symbolically satisfying Bricker might find it, actually means very close to nothing. Yeah. This might’ve been a good teaching moment for the kid. Basing policy on what you learn from a CNN report might be a bit shallow. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2011, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/103 "2011-10-17T22:12:49Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > 3 years later and the truth about it comes out. It’s as public a document as public can be. Anybody who didn’t know about it has only themselves, and their “news” purveyors perhaps, to blame. There is no secret here. > [@](#): > > This was easily one of the most important pieces of legislation moving forward and it was rushed through the process. Since you insist on continuing that falsehood, it’s necessary to continue to remind you that this bill took a year and a half to get through Congress. Legislation was first filed by Harry Truman, and it’s been a topic of national debate since Teddy Roosevelt’s 1912 campaign. “Rushed”? :rolleyes: How does “Fox never told me any of the details and I was too damn lazy to go find out” become “It was rushed” and “The truth was hidden” in your mind? :dubious: > [@](#): > > \And you seem to forget the [vote buying](http://www.civitasreview.com/healthcare/more-expensive-vote-buying-for-health-care-bill/) involved using tax payer money. And you do not understand where the money went - to the constituencies of the legislators who, in the normal way legislation is constructed, managed to get it for them. NOT into their bank accounts, as you insinuate. IOW you have not yet posted a single factual sentence in this thread. Do make a little effort in the future, will you please? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2011, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/104 "2011-10-17T22:21:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > My rebuttal to him has been that we can’t pick and choose which of God’s laws to follow More of your evasion there. It doesn’t work here, as you know, but shame on you for using it on your own kid. Oh well, if he’s as smart as you say, he can grasp it too. In case you yourself don’t get it: All that religionists who say what you did do is pick \*which \*laws they proclaim to be “God’s” (and therefore, conveniently, undebatable) and \*which \*are merely Man’s. You’re declaring your own personal opinions, however derived at, to be ordained by God - which is a claim you wouldn’t even need to resort to if they held up to any rational scrutiny. Now, how about finally providing some substance to your “position” that goes a bit deeper than “Suck it Democrats!” ? It’s been requested multiple times, in the faint hope that it even exists. How about pleasantly surprising us? Can you do that? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2011, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/105 "2011-10-17T22:22:28Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > How does “Fox never told me any of the details and I was too damn lazy to go find out” become “It was rushed” and “The truth was hidden” in your mind? :dubious: The evidence that it was rushed is the topic of this thread. There was no due diligence in this legislation. But as is typical when you can’t debate something, you throw FOX into it like the some kind of liberal cow patty. The numbers used to cost out CLASS were bogus from day one and it’s taken 3 years for the President to admit it. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > And you do not understand where the money went - to the constituencies of the legislators who, in the normal way legislation is constructed, managed to get it for them. NOT into their bank accounts, as you insinuate. The votes were bought, there is no other way to describe it. It was tax money used to prop up a politician’s base in order to purchase a vote. To say that money went to the constituents is nothing short of saying THEIR vote was purchased as well. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2011, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/106 "2011-10-17T22:49:32Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > The evidence that it was rushed is the topic of this thread. No, the OP is evidence of a lot of things, but not that. > [@](#): > > There was no due diligence in this legislation. You know better than that, and if not, you have no excuse. > [@](#): > > But as is typical when you can’t debate something, you throw FOX into it like the some kind of liberal cow patty. Then where _do_ you you get your talking points from? Not the world of fact, we’ve established that already. So, if it isn’t Fox, what _is_ your excuse? > [@](#): > > The votes were bought, there is no other way to describe it. Already explained. It’s how legislation is _created_. Another thing you have no excuse for not understanding. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2011, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/107 "2011-10-17T23:17:55Z")
Perhaps **Macgiver** can offer us an example of legislation he approves wholeheartedly and was accomplished without any of this civic corruption aka “gambling at Ricks Place, shockedshocked”. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2011, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/108 "2011-10-17T23:19:33Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > No, the OP is evidence of a lot of things, but not that. > > You know better than that, and if not, you have no excuse. > > Then where _do_ you you get your talking points from? Not the world of fact, we’ve established that already. So, if it isn’t Fox, what _is_ your excuse? It’s like you didn’t even read the thread. [White House eliminates insurance program for long-term care](http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/white-house-kills-long-term-care-program/2011/10/14/gIQAVZLYkL_story.html) > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Already explained. It’s how legislation is _created_. “already explained”. HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa. Tears of laughter on that. Obama had to buy votes for legislation that wasn’t properly vetted and he used taxpayer money to do it. A fool and our tax money are soon parted. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2011, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/109 "2011-10-17T23:28:36Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Perhaps **Macgiver** can offer us an example of legislation he approves wholeheartedly and was accomplished without any of this civic corruption aka “gambling at Ricks Place, shockedshocked”. [House Republicans Back No-Earmarks Rule](http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/house-republicans-back-no-earmarks-rule/) ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/110 "2011-10-18T01:22:26Z")
> [@](#): > > The evidence that it was rushed is the topic of this thread. There was no due diligence in this legislation. A great many legislators have admitted (even bragged) that they did not do due diligence on this legislation, but it can’t have been because it was too rushed, because it wasn’t. Rather, those legislators’ lack of due diligence is just plain their own fault. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/111 "2011-10-18T14:06:11Z")
Three pages and not a single “forced down our throats” mention? You guys are slipping. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/112 "2011-10-18T14:58:25Z")
nm ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/113 "2011-10-18T14:59:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > _SIGH_ > > Congress should not have passed the CLASS Act. Discuss. > > Or: > > Resolved: Congress should not have passed the CLASS Act. Can’t really say the passage of the CLASS Act was a waste of time. What else were they going to do with their time? It’s not like they have so much they’re trying to accomplish, but they just can’t find the time to fit it in. And, how much time did it actually take? We’ve probably put more man hours debating it in this thread then Congress spent on it. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/114 "2011-10-18T15:09:39Z")
For those looking to educate themselves, a useful and reasonably well-balanced column on the history of CLASS: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/what-the-class-act-says-about-health-care-reform/2011/08/25/gIQA8cL0rL\_blog.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/what-the-class-act-says-about-health-care-reform/2011/08/25/gIQA8cL0rL_blog.html) Takehome paragraph: > [@](#): > > [T]he problem with CLASS isn’t that it unexpectedly failed in practice. It’s that further analysis showed it worked exactly as the Congressional Budget Office predicted: it saved money in the first 10 years and cost money after that. > > In other words, the motto here is “trust CBO.” And what does CBO say about the rest of the health-care law? They predict that it saves some money in the first 10 years, and much more in the decades after that. The removal of CLASS means the savings in the first 10 years will be somewhat smaller and the savings in the subsequent decades somewhat larger. But their underlying quality of the analysis is unchanged, and, if anything, strengthened. ---
**Author:** ![Barrett\_Bonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/5e9695/32.png) [@Barrett\_Bonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barrett_Bonden)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/115 "2011-10-18T20:10:37Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > First of all, I wish Bricker’s kid had never been brought up in the first place, but once he was, insulting him is just classless. > > That said, I think there’s an important point that is being totally overlooked here… now I really know nothing about this issue, but assuming what I’ve gleaned from this thread, democrats came up with a complex plan they wanted to implement, but realized that it might not be fiscally sound, so built into it a proviso saying it had to be studied and would only go into effect if it would, in fact, be fiscally sound. In other words, this did something that EVERY DAMN LAW EVERY PASSED SHOULD DO!!! We should be praising CLASS from the rooftops. If only the Bush tax cuts and the invasion of Iraq had come with similar clauses… Kind of puts a lie to the old “Democrats just spend and spend and spend no matter what” chestnut… > Furthermore, I think it’s facile to say that the flaw was so simple that a 5th-grader could point it out. Now, again, I’m hardly an expert on the issue (having never even heard of CLASS before this thread), but there are plenty of extraordinarily complicated societal and sociological issues which you can look at, can make a very simple and not-totally-meaningless analogy to some fable or parable or other, and say “see, here’s why it’s going to fail”. Sometimes it will turn out that it will in fact fail. And sometimes it won’t. But very few things that involve topics as complicated as health care are really truly meaningfully analyzable via appeal to Aesop. Or to think about it another way, Democrats who proposed this law in the first place might be wrong headed or incorrect about any number of things, but they’re certainly not utter idiots. And if it took three years of economic analysis by professionals to demonstrate that the plan would in fact not be long-term self-sustaining, then I’m pretty sure that Bricker’s son’s analysis, however, symbolically satisfying Bricker might find it, actually means very close to nothing. +1 PS - **Bricker** , your son sounds like an awesome kid. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/116 "2011-10-18T22:27:54Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Takehome paragraph: The CBO? What do \*they \*know? They’re even saying Obama’s jobs bill will create 1.9 million of them. That can’t be right; so we gotta vote against the thing. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/117 "2011-10-18T22:43:13Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Perhaps **Macgiver** can offer us an example of legislation he approves wholeheartedly and was accomplished without any of this civic corruption aka “gambling at Ricks Place, shockedshocked”. And perhaps then he can inform us of what would be better legislation to attack the health care problem with than this thing he talkingpointedly calls “Obamacare”. Since, unfortunately, there’s no basis upon which to expect that, I’d be happy to get a responsible response to that from \*anybody \*in his faction. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/118 "2011-10-18T23:04:06Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > And perhaps then he can inform us of what would be better legislation to attack the health care problem with than this thing he talkingpointedly calls “Obamacare”. Since, unfortunately, there’s no basis upon which to expect that, I’d be happy to get a responsible response to that from \*anybody \*in his faction. That’s not fair. We have to prove the new health care plan is better than their yet to be identified plan. We fall into their trap if we try, because they know by definition anything that you slap Obama’s name on can’t be good. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/119 "2011-10-18T23:04:31Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > For those looking to educate themselves, a useful and reasonably well-balanced column on the history of CLASS: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/what-the-class-act-says-about-health-care-reform/2011/08/25/gIQA8cL0rL\_blog.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/what-the-class-act-says-about-health-care-reform/2011/08/25/gIQA8cL0rL_blog.html) > > Takehome paragraph: > \*\* > In other words, the motto here is “trust CBO.” And what does CBO say about the rest of the health-care law? They predict that it saves some money in the first 10 years, and much more in the decades after that.\*\* That’s not accurate. They deferred money in the first 5 years to be used in the next 5 years of the 10 year estimate. It was an accounting trick. [This was discussed in the same newspaper in 2009](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/09/AR2009070902607.html): "Third, a new gimmick has been designed to pretend that health reform is fully paid for. The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions adopted a measure, endorsed by the Obama administration, to have the government provide long-term care insurance in which workers would be automatically enrolled unless they opt out. Premiums would flow into the system beginning in 2011, but benefits would not begin to be paid out until five years later; consequently, over the 10-year budget window through which the Congressional Budget Office assesses legislation, the program would bring in $58 billion, according to CBO estimates. Thankfully, the committee also agreed to an amendment, offered by Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), to require that premiums be set at an actuarially sound level – not so low that the program would end up further draining the federal treasury. Still, the money that flows in during the 10-year budget window will flow back out again. These are not “savings” that can be honestly counted on the balance sheet of reform. " This was referred to by Republicans in their[assessment](http://www.speaker.gov/UploadedFiles/ObamaCareReport.pdf) of it earlier this year. So the idea that it was an accounting gimmick goes back to 2009. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2011, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769/120 "2011-10-18T23:11:54Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > So the idea that it was an accounting gimmick goes back to 2009. So, you are saying the government shouldn’t use accounting tricks? Or just Democrats? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-class-obama/599769.md?page=7)