Pelosi: Pass Health Reform - To Find Out What's In It!

[Zacha341]

This is more than an another effervescent "grinning" gaff on her part... House Speaker Pelosi's "comment" speak to the bipartisan and independent reticence [[not just the usual right wing suspects) many Americans have about this wide sweeping federally mandated health care plan.

It will be interesting to see the "damage control" applied. See below a link from USNew.com and below that the full transcript [[which in itself is quite revealing) from the official http://www.speaker.gov site:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/...ats-in-it.html

Pelosi: Pass Health Reform So You Can Find Out What’s In It

March 09, 2010 06:05 PM ET

By Peter Roff

It has been said well and famously that politicians only really commit a gaffe when they tell the truth without meaning to. Add House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to the list.

Speaking Tuesday to the 2010 Legislative Conference for the National Association of Counties, Pelosi began the windup of her healthcare pitch by alluding to the controversies over the healthcare bill and the process by which it has reached its current state. Then, just after saying, "It's going to be very, very exciting," Pelosi gaffed, telling the local elected officials assembled that Congress "[has] to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it, away from the fog of controversy."

This is the same Nancy Pelosi who, only weeks earlier, was bragging about the transparency of the process that produced the bill that is currently stalled in Congress. The same Pelosi who brushed aside concerns raised by organizations like Let Freedom Ring!--where I am a senior fellow--that members of Congress actually commit to reading the bill before voting for it and that it be posted online for at least 72 hours before any vote so that the American people can read it, too.

In fact, as supporters of the current healthcare bill will no doubt point out, the bill Pelosi and the White House are trying to move to the president's desk passed the Senate at Christmas. It has been on the Web for well over 72 hours; indeed it has been discussed and dissected by healthcare policy experts repeatedly over the last two months. But if that is the case, why is Pelosi telling the National Association of Counties that the bill has to pass before they--and the rest of us "can find out what's in it." What is she hiding?

See below the FULL text transcript of the speakers talk to the 2010 Legislative Conference for National Association of Counties:

http://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/pressreleases?id=1576

[ejames01]

Let Freedom Ring!? Really?

[johnsmith]

Pelosi: Pass Health Reform So You Can Find Out What’s In It

Pelosi is certifiably insane, isn't she?

[ghettopalmetto]

For those of us who just crash-landed in the United States and taken a sudden interest in our government as of January 20, 2009, this comment by Speaker Pelosi may seem irresponsible.

Anyone who paid the least bit of attention in high school civics class knows, however, that the final provisions of the bill won't be determined until it passes. Until then, the bill will be subject to amendments throughout the reconciliation process. In other words, you're not gonna know how the sausage tastes until you finish making it and cooking it.

I'm so tired of hearing this, "They haven't even read the bill" business. You're bitching about it without reading it, so what's the difference?

[johnsmith]

But, Pelosi is certifiably insane, isn't she?

[ejames01]

But, Pelosi is certifiably insane, isn't she?

What makes her insane?

[Jimaz]

What makes her insane?

i.e. lay out your cards, johnsmith. Quit beating around the bush in hiding.

[humanmachinery]

It's true that the process for crafting American legislation is horribly inefficient and dysfunctional [[largely a process of the nightmarish two party system and the way in which the legislature is elected and operates), but arguing that the majority of Americans do not want a public option is absurd.

A September poll by the New York Times and CBS found that 65% of respondents want the public option. This included a plurality of persons who self-identified as Republicans.
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/20...25pollgrx.html

An October poll by The Washington Post and ABC showed a 57% rate of support, again, with a majority of Republicans supporting it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101902451.html

A December poll by Thomson Reuters Corp gave the public option a rate of 59.9% of support among the respondents. In this survey though, the results were far more polarized. Only 33% of Republicans favored the measure.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5B20OL20091203

The only recent poll I can find where a majority of the respondents opposed the public option was held by The Wall Street Journal and NBC, and a number of people have pointed out that one of the main pollsters has a history of working for insurance companies and the Republican Party. His writings on policy helped craft a number of important anti-reform stances. Of course, you could also point out that his opposing half in the survey was a Democrat operative, but by either means, the poll was compromised.

Logic dictates though, regardless of your ideological bent, that if the government is going to mandate the purchase of health insurance, there needs to be a government alternative to private policies. Insisting that everyone buy health insurance, and then requiring they do so from the private sector is nothing less than showering money upon the insurance industry. It's a disaster in the making for both the country and the Democrats.

I'd definitely like to see more tort-reform measures passed [[far too much of the government is controlled by lawyers), but pretty much every credible number cruncher [[including the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office) has said the Republican Plan will do very little to cut health care costs.

And health care spending is already the biggest portion of the federal budget, passing up welfare, military, and infrastructure by a fairly wide margin now. Everyone knows that deficit reduction needs to be done at some point, but no one can agree about where to raise taxes, and where to slash the budget.

The arguments about how to fix this problem fall into three main categories.

1.) eliminate health care spending altogether.

2.) institute some means of price controls for government-subsidized medicine

3.) place limitations upon how and when lawyers can sue agents of the medical business, and create co-ops


The math shows that option #2 is the most efficient means of helping manage the financial blow to individuals, but instead we've got crap like this going down in the legislative process.

[Zacha341]

More stealth then insanity I'd say... they are simply not listening to the fact that some of their constituents are against this bill. And this constituent body can not entirely be wrote off as just the right-wing nuts.

She is just forging ahead. I'd like to know why she is always fiercely smiling, wide-eyed and school girl "giggling", while saying the most inane things [[that would not be tolerated where it coming from the right wing)...

That recent interview on Charlie Rose show recently was pretty revealing in addition to the transcript from the conference link supplied above. I am sure it is on youtube somewhere... it was a "cream" puff interview as they go. Rose let a lot of stuff go by...

Pelosi is certifiably insane, isn't she?

[Sstashmoo]

From what I've read about this "health care" plan is it is sounding like a version of auto insurance legislation for medical insurance. This is nothing more than politicians appeasing their lobbyists. We are going to get this take it or get fined insurance rammed down our throats and it is going to be a disaster. Right in the bill, it says premiums can be 125% of what they are right now. We are going to have the same thing we have now with even higher premiums, and forget whether or not you can afford it, you will afford it or else.

Insurance companies are rotten to the core.

Just another nail in the coffin and one step closer to all out revolt. I am to the point with Obama, he is just another Bush, another puppet to the powers that be. We really have no "President", just a liaison between power lobbies and the people.

[ghettopalmetto]

More stealth then insanity I'd say... they are simply not listening to the fact that some of their constituents are against this bill. And this constituent body can not all be wrote off as just the right-wing nuts.

Stealth? This bill has been in the works for well over a year, and if you go back to the 2008 presidential campaign, when Obama made this a central plank in his platform, no one should act surprised by anything that's on the table. The health care bill has already been debated longer than the resolution allowing force in Iraq, Bush's disastrous tax cuts, and the welfare reform of the 1990s.

Zacha's implication that reform should be scrapped because "some" people oppose what they *think* is in the bill speaks to an entitlement mentality of a minority of the populace. Since when do we need 100% consensus to enact legislation? For all the quoting of the Constitution that the Republicans love to do, why aren't they showing us the part that requires 60 votes in the Senate to pass legislation???

The Republican arguments against this bill have simply not held water, and the few constructive ideas they have had, have already been incorporated into the legislation. The fact is, the Republican party does not want ANY type of reform, because they would rather run roughshod over the populace than to see a Democratic president succeed on such an important initiative. If the Republicans were really interested in health care reform, they had 12 years of control over both houses of Congress in order to do so, and they took the opportunity to do absolutely nothing, other than Bush's prescription drug plan that amounts to little more than a giveaway to drug companies.

[maxx]

From what I've read about this "health care" plan is it is sounding like a version of auto insurance legislation for medical insurance. This is nothing more than politicians appeasing their lobbyists. We are going to get this take it or get fined insurance rammed down our throats and it is going to be a disaster. Right in the bill, it says premiums can be 125% of what they are right now. We are going to have the same thing we have now with even higher premiums, and forget whether or not you can afford it, you will afford it or else.

Insurance companies are rotten to the core.

Just another nail in the coffin and one step closer to all out revolt. I am to the point with Obama, he is just another Bush, another puppet to the powers that be. We really have no "President", just a liaison between power lobbies and the people.

Until there is real campaign finance reform in our elections, we are going to have big monied interests influencing Congress. So why blame Obama for trying to work within this corrupt system? Republicans are banking on people like you to stay away from the polls so they can get back in power and get back to enriching the super-rich at the expense of the rest of us. And if we have another Republican president, the Supreme Court will just be a bunch of corporate reps.

[maxx]

zacha314:More stealth then insanity I'd say... they are simply not listening to the fact that some of their constituents are against this bill.

maxx: So you expect every piece of legislation to have 100% popular support? Loads of people opposed Medicare.

[Sstashmoo]

Quote: "Republicans are banking on people like you to stay away from the polls"

And if we do show up, they always have the electoral college to fall back on.

Quote: "And if we have another Republican president,"

What does it matter? Haven't you figured that out yet?

[firstandten]

]Until there is real campaign finance reform in our elections, we are going to have big monied interests influencing Congress.[/b] So why blame Obama for trying to work within this corrupt system? Republicans are banking on people like you to stay away from the polls so they can get back in power and get back to enriching the super-rich at the expense of the rest of us. And if we have another Republican president, the Supreme Court will just be a bunch of corporate reps.

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission just guaranteed you won't be seeing campaign finance reform in the forseeable future

[maxx]

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission just guaranteed you won't be seeing campaign finance reform in the forseeable future

Yes, the octopus keeps wrapping its tentacles tighter around the government. And if the Republicans win the next election there will be another round of redistricting in their favor.

Sstashmoo's defeatism says a lot about some churchgoers. They do little to help themselves in any significant way --like getting involved politically -- but they give loads of money they can't afford to crooks wearing Roman collars and I don't mean RC priests. The consequences of magical thinking. With all the unemployed people in Detroit, the City Council's chambers should be filled with citizens learning about what's going on or not happening.

[mjs]

I'm so tired of hearing this, "They haven't even read the bill" business. You're bitching about it without reading it, so what's the difference?

Uhhm, could the difference be that actually reading bills is their job? I now have expert reports, trial write-ups, and proposed procedural changes to read at work before I participate in discussions on how we can use the information to solve our problems. During our layoff, I had the time to read the first version of the bill, but I no longer have the time to read every 1000 plus pages of blabber. Come on, can't people see by now that almost any bill longer than 20 pages is simply designed to either confuse, create loopholes, stuff with pork, or a combination of all three? These guys are snowballing you and the worst part is THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO WORK FOR YOU!!!

[Sstashmoo]

Quote: "Sstashmoo's defeatism says a lot about some churchgoers."

If what I'm saying sounds defeatist about electing politicians, our current President outright lied behind a podium for two years to all of us. Lies to give him an opportunity to serve his "corporate" masters. You appear to be living with some false sense of security in regard to our current political process and the players therein. Good luck with that..

Look at what's going in right now with Obamacare. This isn't any good for the people. This is a plan to make the Insurance companies filthy rich, forcing the working people to pay for insurance for everyone. The insurance companies are frothing at the mouth at the thought of getting 60 million new customers, controlling the pay of those in the medical field, and you and I [[If you work) are going to pay for it all. These politicians work for you?

[TKshreve]

Uhhm, could the difference be that actually reading bills is their job? I now have expert reports, trial write-ups, and proposed procedural changes to read at work before I participate in discussions on how we can use the information to solve our problems. During our layoff, I had the time to read the first version of the bill, but I no longer have the time to read every 1000 plus pages of blabber. Come on, can't people see by now that almost any bill longer than 20 pages is simply designed to either confuse, create loopholes, stuff with pork, or a combination of all three? These guys are snowballing you and the worst part is THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO WORK FOR YOU!!!

Just like insurance companies.

Great post - Couldn't be more spot on.

[firstandten]

Quote: "Sstashmoo's defeatism says a lot about some churchgoers."

If what I'm saying sounds defeatist about electing politicians, our current President outright lied behind a podium for two years to all of us. Lies to give him an opportunity to serve his "corporate" masters. You appear to be living with some false sense of security in regard to our current political process and the players therein. Good luck with that..

Look at what's going in right now with Obamacare. This isn't any good for the people. This is a plan to make the Insurance companies filthy rich, forcing the working people to pay for insurance for everyone. The insurance companies are frothing at the mouth at the thought of getting 60 million new customers, controlling the pay of those in the medical field, and you and I [[If you work) are going to pay for it all. These politicians work for you?

This health bill is a very pragmatic approach [[note I did not say perfect approach) to a political reality in this country. The votes were and are not there for any universal single payer approach. Clinton failed trying to go it alone and not include congress with health care reform. Obama may have over-learn from Clinton's mistakes by insisting congress write the bill. Of the three branches of government the executive branch probably is behind both the legislative and the judical in influence and actual power. Too many people talk like the president of the U.S has the power of a benevolent dictator. There's good reason why the big issues... the issues that directly affect you and I, common people, can't get done to our satisfaction.

If you read Obama's history he could have become a corporalist right out of Harvard, when just about every big time law firm wanted the editor of the Harvard law review. He chose to go another, poorer route

[Sstashmoo]

Obama's net worth is somewhere around 9 million. Being a Senator must pay pretty well.

Quote: "Too many people talk like the president of the U.S has the power of a benevolent dictator."

And I think too many underestimate the influence of President, he may not be clanging the bell, but he's the guy that ordered it rung.

[oladub]

If you read Obama's history he could have become a corporalist right out of Harvard, when just about every big time law firm wanted the editor of the Harvard law review. He chose to go another, poorer route

Obama is a corporatist or at least he has provided huge sums of money for his handlers in the banking and insurace industries. His solutions combine corporate profits with expansions of federal government. Of course he didn't offer any any single player plan. What would his campaign contributors stand to gain if he did?

[Zacha341]

Hmm, OK now the bill has past -- perhaps now he can switch out of "community" organizing mode ala the communal zeal for federal expansion and get down to addressing for example our economy specific to private sector jobs and get some people around him that know something about that... well one can hope.

Obama is a corporatist or at least he has provided huge sums of money for his handlers in the banking and insurance industries. His solutions combine corporate profits with expansions of federal government. Of course he didn't offer any any single player plan. What would his campaign contributors stand to gain if he did?

[Danny]

YAY CLAP, CLAP, CLAP, Universal Health Care for all Americans. The People's Health Care. We're being like Canada now and the Canadians love it.

[firstandten]

Obama is a corporatist or at least he has provided huge sums of money for his handlers in the banking and insurace industries. His solutions combine corporate profits with expansions of federal government. Of course he didn't offer any any single player plan. What would his campaign contributors stand to gain if he did?

I agree, Obama is a corporatist, just as Hoover claimed FDR was a corporatist.

Some people would look at that word and think OH No! here comes the second coming of Mussolini. We're going to become a facist state under Obama.

I don't see it that way. Obama is not a socialist, and he is not a laissez-faire capitalist, he's right in the middle he's that third-way, corporatist politican who understands that as much as he personally would like a single payer plan , that represents extreme change that our country wouldn't accept. The country couldn't even accept a government run plan as part of the exchange The most logical conclusion was to keep the insurance companies in play, but to regulate them.
The insurance companies in turn needed a larger pool of people so they could fulfull the government mandate. Thus, the need for everyone to get insurance.

Obama, along with just about every other member of the Senate has access to huge amounts of money, but remember this.. He made most of his wealth from his two books and he also got millions of dollars in campaign contributions from small donors.

The fact that Obama was teaching law courses and working for a small law firm after Harvard when he could have been a partner at some top tier law firm making millions says alot about the kind of person he is.