Obama's first term

  • Thread starter Thread starter mlp
  • Start date Start date
Some of Obama's first-term accomplishments:

Provided stimulus funding to boost private sector spaceflight programs

Developed stimulus package, which includes approximately $18 billion for non-defense scientific research and development


Provided $12.2 Billion in new funding for Individuals With Disabilities Education Act

Signed the Christopher and Dana Reeve Paralysis Act, the first piece of comprehensive legislation aimed at improving the lives of Americans living with paralysis


Added $4.6 billion to the Veterans Administration budget to recruit and retain more mental health professionals

Signed an executive order, directing the Veterans Administration to hire 1,600 new mental health professionals, and to expand the capacity of its crisis line so those who are in crisis can see a counselor within 24 hours

Set up a task force to recommend other ways the government can help those suffering from traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder

Provided travel expenses to families of fallen soldiers to be on hand when the body arrives at Dover AFB

Reversed the policy of barring media coverage during the return of fallen soldiers to Dover Air Force Base

Provided the Department of Veterans Affairs with more than $1.4 billion to improve services to America's Veterans

Repealed DADT


Signed financial reform law establishing a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to look out for the interests of everyday Americans

Signed financial reform law prohibiting banks from engaging in proprietary trading (trading the bank's own money to turn a profit, often in conflict with their customers' interests)

Signed financial reform law requiring lenders to verify applicants' credit history, income, and employment status

Signed financial reform law allowing shareholders of publicly traded companies to vote on executive pay

Eliminated subsidies to private lender middlemen of student loans and protect student borrowers

Established Credit Card Bill of Rights, preventing credit card companies from imposing arbitrary rate increases on customers


Increased funding for national parks and forests by 10%


Significantly expanded Pell grants, which help low-income students pay for college


Extended Benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees

First president to endorse same-sex marriage equality

Expanded hate crime law in the US to include sexual orientation through the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act

Nearly $80 million in additional grants to fund HIV/AIDS care and end ADAP wait lists

Ensured transgender veterans receive respectful care according to their true gender through the Veterans Health Administration

Announced HUD's new rule protect against housing discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity

Created first-ever U.S. government strategy dedicated to combating human rights abuses against LGBT people abroad


Reversed 'global gag rule', allowing US aid to go to organizations regardless of whether they provide abortions


Lifted restrictions granting Cuban Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send remittances to the island


Signed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, giving the FDA the authority to regulate the manufacturing, marketing, and sale of tobacco for the first time


Signed New START Treaty - nuclear arms reduction pact with Russia

Signed the Weapons Systems Acquisition Reform Act to stop fraud and wasteful spending in the defense procurement and contracting system


Signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, restoring basic protections against pay discrimination for women and other workers


Issued executive order to repeal Bush era restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research


Signed the Children's Health Insurance Reauthorization Act, which provides health care to 11 million kids -- 4 million of whom were previously uninsured

Cut prescription drug cost for medicare recipients by 50%

Health Care Reform Bill, preventing insurance companies from denying insurance because of a pre-existing condition

Health Care Reform Bill, allowing children to remain covered by their parents' insurance until the age of 26

Tax cuts for up to 3.5 million small businesses to help pay for employee health care coverage

Tax credits for up to 29 million individuals to help pay for health insurance

Expansion of Medicaid to all individuals under age 65 with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level

Require health insurance plans to disclose how much of the premium actually goes to patient care
 
There's some good and bad in the Affordable Care Act. Whether you think 26-year-olds remaining on their parent's health insurance is good or not, the good still far outweigh the bad. However, a single-payer healthcare system is what we need to continue fighting for. It'll be difficult to do with a regressive House, but the Senate got a little more progressive last night, and there's at least one house in America that Mitt Romney can't buy.
 
You stop being a child long before age 26. The rest of us got our rates increased because of this.

Yeah he's done some good things. Making me pay for someone else's 20-something "child" when I don't make much money as it is was not one of them.

The 1 trillion dollars spent on war since 2001 probably has made a far greater dent in the budget than the money put aside for health and welfare. Just saying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kibbleforlola
The 1 trillion dollars spent on war since 2001 probably has made a far greater dent in the budget than the money put aside for health and welfare. Just saying.

But my rates didn't increase because of the war. They increased because of Obamacare. Hey I'm glad he won since my chosen candidate didn't stand a chance. But I shouldn't have to pay for 25-year-old children. I already have to contribute plenty to minor children that don't belong to me.
 
The 1 trillion dollars spent on war since 2001 probably has made a far greater dent in the budget than the money put aside for health and welfare. Just saying.
The US spends that much yearly for health and welfare, not even counting social security, another huge hunk.


" The government spent approximately $1.03 trillion on 83 means-tested federal welfare programs in fiscal year 2011 alone — a price tag that makes welfare that year the government’s largest expenditure, according to new data released by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee.The total sum taxpayers spent on federal welfare programs was derived from a new Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on federal welfare spending — which topped out at $745.84 billion for fiscal year 2011 — combined with an analysis from the Republican Senate Budget Committee staff of state spending on federal welfare programs (based on “The Oxford Handbook of State andLocal Government Finance”), which reached $282.7 billion in fiscal year 2011.The data excludes spending on Social Security, Medicare, means-tested health care for veterans without service-connected disabilities, and the means-tested veterans pension programs. According to the CRS report, which focused solely on federal spending for federal welfare programs, spending on federal welfare programs increased $563.413 billion in fiscal year 2008 to $745.84 billion in fiscal year 2011 — a 32 percent increase.Further, spending on the 10 largest federal welfare programs has doubled as a share of the federal budget in the last 30 years: In inflation-adjusted dollars, according to Republican staff on the Senate Budget Committee, the amount spent on these programs has increased 378 percent in that 30 year time frame.CRS reports that food assistance programs — the third largest welfare category behind health and cash assistance — experienced the greatest increase in spending, with 71 percent more spending in 2011 than in 2008. The agency explained that this spending increase was largely due to the growth in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps.CRS further noted that the largest expenditure category, health, was 37 percent higher in fiscal year 2011 than fiscal year 2008. In that same period, cash aid increased 12 percent, education assistance increased 57 percent, housing and development assistance increased 2 percent, social services increased 3 percent, employment and training remained the same (though fluctuated in intervening years), and energy assistance was 67 percent higher in fiscal year 2011 than fiscal year 2008.The total federal spending on federal welfare programs vastly outpaced fiscal year 2011 spending on such federal expenditures as non-war defense ($540 billion), Social Security ($725 billion), Medicare ($480 billion), and departments such as Justice ($30.5 billion), Transportation ($77.3 billion) and Education ($65.486 billion) — a fact that alarmed the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, who requested the report from CRS. These astounding figures demonstrate that the United States spends more on federal welfare than any other program in the federal budget,” Sessions wrote The Daily Caller in an email. “It is time to restore — not retreat from — the moral principles of the 1996 welfare reform. Such reforms, combined with measures to promote growth, will help both the recipient and the Treasury.”When state spending on federal welfare programs — specifically Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program — was thrown into the mix, the amount spent on federal welfare increased 28 percent, from $798.813 billion in fiscal year 2008 to $1.028.54 trillion in fiscal year 2011.“No longer should we measure compassion by how much money the government spends, but by how many people we help to rise out of poverty,” Sessions continued. “Welfare assistance should be seen as temporary whenever possible, and the goal must be to help more of our fellow citizens attain gainful employment and financialindependence. This is about more than rescuing our finances. It’s about creating a more optimistic future for millions of struggling Americans." .Read the report. http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/18/r...y-2011-at-approx-1-03-trillion/#ixzz2BcBlrYVA
 
May I ask with genuine curiousity, why are so many Americans against a Health Care system like we have here? We have the NHS and although a few say 'we shouldnt have to pay for others healthcare' isnt that alot like saying 'as long as I can afford healthcare F-everyone else'

I saw a photo of Obama hugging a girl whose mother (I believe it was) had passed away from cancer because they couldnt afford the treatment...how is that ok in the Land of the Free?
 
May I ask with genuine curiousity, why are so many Americans against a Health Care system like we have here? We have the NHS and although a few say 'we shouldnt have to pay for others healthcare' isnt that alot like saying 'as long as I can afford healthcare F-everyone else'

I wouldn't say that the same system works everywhere.
 
No one wants to pay for the tax hike it would take to get it, doctors don't want to take the pay cut that subsidized healthcare would mean, pharmaceutical companies don't want it, the insurance industry doesn't want it. Pick something
 
I read that 4 or so Supreme Court judges are likely to retire and be replaced within the next four years. It's sad that those jobs are so politicized, but from a progressive point of view it's good that this happens during Obama's presidency.

It'll be interesting to see what direction the Obama administration takes now on a number of areas. Does anyone know who is replacing Clinton as secretary of state?
 
No one wants to pay for the tax hike it would take to get it, doctors don't want to take the pay cut that subsidized healthcare would mean, pharmaceutical companies don't want it, the insurance industry doesn't want it. Pick something
Then God help anyone who suddenly looses their wealth and needs healthcare...Sorry i think its disgraceful when lives could be save and people are being self serving.
 
I don't disagree with you. I'm spouting off all the reasons I've heard as to why that system is a bad idea. I'm sure I could come up with more given time, but those are what I most frequently hear
 
May I ask with genuine curiousity, why are so many Americans against a Health Care system like we have here? We have the NHS and although a few say 'we shouldnt have to pay for others healthcare' isnt that alot like saying 'as long as I can afford healthcare F-everyone else'

I saw a photo of Obama hugging a girl whose mother (I believe it was) had passed away from cancer because they couldnt afford the treatment...how is that ok in the Land of the Free?
The poor and elderly in the US have government paid healthcare already in medicaid and Medicare. Children are also covered under medicaid unless their parents make a certain amount of money. These programs are rife with waste and fraud, and extremely expensive, with the costs rising each year way faster than the cost of living. People are afraid that with the existing trillions of dollars of debt we have no way of paying back that increases every day, with decreasing revenues because of long- term high unemployment and businesses going bankrupt, that adding healthcare for everyone to that mess is so fiscally unsound as to be dangerous to the health of the economy. If the economy tanks, there won't be money even to help the very poor, sick, young, handicapped, and elderly who cannot care for themselves. There then won't be money to help the poor and ill with even food or shelter, never mind a mammogram.

The US has always been a nation where taking care of yourself and being independent are cherished values. We pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and work hard for what we have, and help those less capable. In addition, this particular bill requires everyone to have and pay for health insurance, even young healthy people. Americans do not like being told they have to purchase something because the government says so, and it has never happened before this bill was passed.
 
When I was 25, had minimal access to health care. I was in college, and the campus health center was pretty basic - you could get antibiotics if you were ill, but they didn't even do lab work to see if that's what you needed or what kind would work best. Anything more complex than that was just referred to a private doctor, which meant most people didn't get things checked. I had to go to the county health center for well-woman exams and birth control, and since I didn't work full time, I paid a reduced rate that was subsidized by taxes.

If I'd had a serious illness or been hit by a car when I was on my bicycle, I wouldn't have been able to pay. Honestly, if I'd needed to do that I would have had to go through bankruptcy. The hospital would have passed the costs on to other people.

I had sinus issues when I was in college, but couldn't afford to get it taken care of. It's possible I could have saved myself years of misery and three expensive surgeries if I'd been able to take care of things back then.

I am extremely fortunate that I have insurance now. Each of my chemo treatments cost more than I make in a year (and I had to have six of them). That's not even counting surgery, radiation, medications, and dozens of doctors appointments. I would have had to choose between losing everything or dying, had I not had insurance.

I expect the rates for everyone at my work will increase next year, because I had the misfortune to get breast cancer. If people are unhappy about that, they can go **** themselves.

It's not right that people have to worry about losing their house and ruining their credit because they're diagnosed with a serious illness. I think it's shameful that people are treated like this in America.

I've seen first hand where people who have do not want to help those who don't have. There's always a reason not to help - race, religion, sexual orientation, lifestyle. My MIL, who is a retired nurse, told me once that someone who came into her hospital didn't "deserve" reduced rates because she had a cell phone. Its disgusting. America may pride itself in helping those who are less fortunate, but the fact is that people die because they can't afford health care. Those people needed help and they weren't getting it.

Yes, there is waste and fraud in the current system. That needs to be fixed, but it shouldn't come at the expense of people's health.
 
I'm certainly not going to argue that access to good quality health care for all is not important or desirable. I don't think the current plan is sustainable, and neither do the many physicians who are retiring early. Hospitals are scrambling to build new unneeded buildings and acquiring all kinds of expensive equipment now, for fear they won't be allowed to later and won't be able to compete with government-owned, taxpayer-paid entities. I think it's going to be a mess for some time, lots of facilities closing, lots of unexpected huge increases in cost, and ultimately it will settle into a single payer system. If the money is still there.
 
The poor and elderly in the US have government paid healthcare already in medicaid and Medicare. Children are also covered under medicaid unless their parents make a certain amount of money. These programs are rife with waste and fraud, and extremely expensive, with the costs rising each year way faster than the cost of living. People are afraid that with the existing trillions of dollars of debt we have no way of paying back that increases every day, with decreasing revenues because of long- term high unemployment and businesses going bankrupt, that adding healthcare for everyone to that mess is so fiscally unsound as to be dangerous to the health of the economy. If the economy tanks, there won't be money even to help the very poor, sick, young, handicapped, and elderly who cannot care for themselves. There then won't be money to help the poor and ill with even food or shelter, never mind a mammogram.

The US has always been a nation where taking care of yourself and being independent are cherished values. We pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and work hard for what we have, and help those less capable. In addition, this particular bill requires everyone to have and pay for health insurance, even young healthy people. Americans do not like being told they have to purchase something because the government says so, and it has never happened before this bill was passed.

Yes, if you are poor AND elderly, or if you're poor AND have minor children, or if you're poor AND disabled, you have access to Medicaid. That leaves out wide swathes of the population, including poor adults w/o minor children (and "poor" means really poor - the poverty level for a family of four is an annual family income below $23,000 as of the last time I checked).

And frankly, if you're lower middle class, you're not going to be able to afford insurance if you aren't lucky enough to be employed by an employer who provides group insurance. Even if you're upper middle class, you're not going to be able to get insurance if you have a pre-existing condition.

I'm about as physically healthy a specimen as you are likely to find, but I took anti-depressants for years. The last time I came off a group plan, the Health Care Portability Act had been enacted, so insurance companies had to sell me insurance after I used up the COBRA coverage. The monthly premium for just major medical with the maximum levels of co-pay was more than $5,000, and it didn't matter whether I waived psych coverage. Tell me who can afford to pay $60,000-$70,000 per year in premiums for major medical coverage?

I haven't had a mammogram or a pap smear in years - there's no point, because if I found out I had cancer, I couldn't get treatment. And I'm not an unusual case by any means.

The people who have been most severely impacted by the healthcare system in this country are working people. All the crap about Americans pulling themselves up by their bootstraps is what people who have been fortunate enough to find themselves covered by group coverage tell themselves to make themselves feel better.

As to people being forced to buy insurance - the only way in which it becomes feasible to provide coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and not drop people if they become chronically ill is to also have the healthy people in the pool - that's what group coverage does in effect - it averages out costs between people who need medical care at any given point and those who don't.