For a little comic relief, a reporter covering a press conference featuring Nancy Pelosi asked why the Healthcare conference committee is meeting behind closed door when the President promised total transparency during his campaign. He continued that he (Obama) had stated with clarity that the process would be open, involve both Parties and would appear on C-Span for all to see. Nancy chuckled and said “The President said a lot of things during the campaign.”
That tells me two things. Number one: Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid never had an intention of conducting the conference committee in public no matter what the President said and number two: that Nancy Pelosi is still peeved that Obama is willing to sacrifice the public option, coverage for illegal immigrants and public finding for abortion in order to strike a deal that will allow a bill to pass.
Coming from the Socialist stronghold of San Francisco, Nancy still believes that the healthcare bill will be nothing but an empty shell without these provisions and that the President should persuade if possible but drag if necessary; the Party, the Congress and the nation to accept these extremely liberal policies. Don’t forget, that in the Marxist philosophy, government must care for people for the good of the collective, and that only faithful socialists know what you need whether you like it or not. Nancy really didn’t want the public option; what she wanted was a government run universal care system identical to European models. She would have settled for the public option only because the way it was laced into the House bill it would have crippled the private health insurance industry allowing the public option to morph into a universal care system over time.
What is known is that the President is beginning to learn that D.C. is not Chicago and even though he has surrounded himself with the best political thugs that money can buy, his corrupt little circle of radical community organizers is no match for the real warlords of Washington, career politicians that have spent decades perfecting the art of torpedoing the aspirations of men with one hundred times the experience that the junior Senator from Illinois had. As Nancy Pelosi erupted into schoolgirl giggles at the mention of Obama’s promise to air the healthcare debate on C-Span it occurred to me that the “Big O” doesn’t have the sway over Congress that he thought he had.
Obama is so intent on getting this bill passed that he was willing to surrender key parts of the legislation that were of prime importance to the most liberal of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. He has been under heavy fire from Progressive Democrats for dealing away the public option and may lose moderate Democrats for not strengthening the language to prevent the public funding of abortion. Of course if he insisted on keeping the public option and caved on the abortion issue the Progressives would be sulking over abortion and the moderates would be furious over the public option. Now nearly every other state is angry about the deals that were given to Louisiana and Nebraska to secure the votes of Nelson and Landrieu and many of those states have their Attorneys General looking into the legality of those deals on the grounds that the Constitution requires that taxes are applied equally among the states.
In the end, I am sure that they will pass something if only to avoid the charge of failure in an election year. After all, Obama hung all his meat on this hook to the exclusion of everything else so not to bring this to fruition would cripple the rest of his agenda. Congressional Democrats are following him over the cliff hoping that since the bill prohibits insurance companies from having exclusions for pre-existing conditions or from dropping clients that have contracted a catastrophic illness, that Americans will view this as something positive that the Democrats have brought to the table.
Here lies the problem. The Bill enacts all of the tax increases and service cuts immediately but the most damaging (and expensive) parts of the bill do not begin to come into play before 2014. Those are also the parts of the bill that provide access to coverage through the government exchange or provide subsidies for people that cannot afford coverage so the uninsured will still be uninsured when Election Day comes around. Without the exchange and subsidies, what insurance will the unemployed have when companies begin laying off workers in response to the increased tax liabilities this bill will levy on business? If the business mandates begin with companies that have over fifty employees, companies with fifty-three can and will drop a few people to remain below the minimum. Companies with a hundred employees that do not currently offer health insurance may end up only being able to afford eighty with insurance.
The other problem for Democrats is that they continue to underestimate the real anger that has been fomenting in the general population. Sixty percent of Americans do not want this bill to pass and most believe that if the conversations must be hidden from the people, then the bill must be too horrible to risk making it public. Even more believe that if the Congressional leadership has to resort to outright bribery to buy the votes for passage, then this bill obviously cannot stand on its own merit and deserves to fall. Congresses refusal to deliver on Obama’s promise of transparency may, in the end, prove to be a larger liability than if they fail to deliver healthcare reform at all.
Democratic spokesmen and White House loyalists have a great strategy for combating the public demand that the President keep his promise and force the Congress to hold the conference hearings openly; they lie. Simple huh? They keep repeating that this administration has restored transparency to Washington and has maintained an openness that was totally absent during the Bush administration. Well actually, that was two lies and another stab at the previous administration. The truth is that during the Bush administration, Congress never held hearings on any bill of this magnitude in secret.
The Bush administration attempted to privatize Social Security and even though many recognized that as a sound move to help control the budget deficit, it was a very controversial subject. As heated as the debates were and as passionate as both sides of the argument were; it was widely recognized that is was an important issue with serious ramifications and that demanded a complete and very public debate. The measure failed in the end but what is the measure of success? Doing something at any cost just to say we’ve done it or doing it right?
No, the Obama administration does not want these hearings held in public because the American people would openly revolt not only if they knew the dirty details of the legislation but at the criminally corrupt Chicago style bribery that they are using to obtain the votes for passage. Those that are surprised that Obama would lie so boldly during the campaign had obviously read only the books written by Obama himself and not the ones written about him.
This administration is transparent? Obama has three dozen Czars holding positions of power that answer to no one; not even Congress. Not only have they refused to speak with Congress about their actions citing executive privilege but the most damaging bits of information about them is being sought out and expunged from the internet whenever it is found. Obama’s campaign spent over nine-hundred thousand dollars in legal fees to seal any personal information about him including school transcripts, thesis papers, business dealings, legal records and of course, the long form of his Hawaii birth certificate….you know, the one that would actually have a doctor’s signature and a state seal on it.
I suppose the case could be made that this administration is very transparent. After all, what is more transparent than the total absence of substance?
Paul
That tells me two things. Number one: Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid never had an intention of conducting the conference committee in public no matter what the President said and number two: that Nancy Pelosi is still peeved that Obama is willing to sacrifice the public option, coverage for illegal immigrants and public finding for abortion in order to strike a deal that will allow a bill to pass.
Coming from the Socialist stronghold of San Francisco, Nancy still believes that the healthcare bill will be nothing but an empty shell without these provisions and that the President should persuade if possible but drag if necessary; the Party, the Congress and the nation to accept these extremely liberal policies. Don’t forget, that in the Marxist philosophy, government must care for people for the good of the collective, and that only faithful socialists know what you need whether you like it or not. Nancy really didn’t want the public option; what she wanted was a government run universal care system identical to European models. She would have settled for the public option only because the way it was laced into the House bill it would have crippled the private health insurance industry allowing the public option to morph into a universal care system over time.
What is known is that the President is beginning to learn that D.C. is not Chicago and even though he has surrounded himself with the best political thugs that money can buy, his corrupt little circle of radical community organizers is no match for the real warlords of Washington, career politicians that have spent decades perfecting the art of torpedoing the aspirations of men with one hundred times the experience that the junior Senator from Illinois had. As Nancy Pelosi erupted into schoolgirl giggles at the mention of Obama’s promise to air the healthcare debate on C-Span it occurred to me that the “Big O” doesn’t have the sway over Congress that he thought he had.
Obama is so intent on getting this bill passed that he was willing to surrender key parts of the legislation that were of prime importance to the most liberal of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. He has been under heavy fire from Progressive Democrats for dealing away the public option and may lose moderate Democrats for not strengthening the language to prevent the public funding of abortion. Of course if he insisted on keeping the public option and caved on the abortion issue the Progressives would be sulking over abortion and the moderates would be furious over the public option. Now nearly every other state is angry about the deals that were given to Louisiana and Nebraska to secure the votes of Nelson and Landrieu and many of those states have their Attorneys General looking into the legality of those deals on the grounds that the Constitution requires that taxes are applied equally among the states.
In the end, I am sure that they will pass something if only to avoid the charge of failure in an election year. After all, Obama hung all his meat on this hook to the exclusion of everything else so not to bring this to fruition would cripple the rest of his agenda. Congressional Democrats are following him over the cliff hoping that since the bill prohibits insurance companies from having exclusions for pre-existing conditions or from dropping clients that have contracted a catastrophic illness, that Americans will view this as something positive that the Democrats have brought to the table.
Here lies the problem. The Bill enacts all of the tax increases and service cuts immediately but the most damaging (and expensive) parts of the bill do not begin to come into play before 2014. Those are also the parts of the bill that provide access to coverage through the government exchange or provide subsidies for people that cannot afford coverage so the uninsured will still be uninsured when Election Day comes around. Without the exchange and subsidies, what insurance will the unemployed have when companies begin laying off workers in response to the increased tax liabilities this bill will levy on business? If the business mandates begin with companies that have over fifty employees, companies with fifty-three can and will drop a few people to remain below the minimum. Companies with a hundred employees that do not currently offer health insurance may end up only being able to afford eighty with insurance.
The other problem for Democrats is that they continue to underestimate the real anger that has been fomenting in the general population. Sixty percent of Americans do not want this bill to pass and most believe that if the conversations must be hidden from the people, then the bill must be too horrible to risk making it public. Even more believe that if the Congressional leadership has to resort to outright bribery to buy the votes for passage, then this bill obviously cannot stand on its own merit and deserves to fall. Congresses refusal to deliver on Obama’s promise of transparency may, in the end, prove to be a larger liability than if they fail to deliver healthcare reform at all.
Democratic spokesmen and White House loyalists have a great strategy for combating the public demand that the President keep his promise and force the Congress to hold the conference hearings openly; they lie. Simple huh? They keep repeating that this administration has restored transparency to Washington and has maintained an openness that was totally absent during the Bush administration. Well actually, that was two lies and another stab at the previous administration. The truth is that during the Bush administration, Congress never held hearings on any bill of this magnitude in secret.
The Bush administration attempted to privatize Social Security and even though many recognized that as a sound move to help control the budget deficit, it was a very controversial subject. As heated as the debates were and as passionate as both sides of the argument were; it was widely recognized that is was an important issue with serious ramifications and that demanded a complete and very public debate. The measure failed in the end but what is the measure of success? Doing something at any cost just to say we’ve done it or doing it right?
No, the Obama administration does not want these hearings held in public because the American people would openly revolt not only if they knew the dirty details of the legislation but at the criminally corrupt Chicago style bribery that they are using to obtain the votes for passage. Those that are surprised that Obama would lie so boldly during the campaign had obviously read only the books written by Obama himself and not the ones written about him.
This administration is transparent? Obama has three dozen Czars holding positions of power that answer to no one; not even Congress. Not only have they refused to speak with Congress about their actions citing executive privilege but the most damaging bits of information about them is being sought out and expunged from the internet whenever it is found. Obama’s campaign spent over nine-hundred thousand dollars in legal fees to seal any personal information about him including school transcripts, thesis papers, business dealings, legal records and of course, the long form of his Hawaii birth certificate….you know, the one that would actually have a doctor’s signature and a state seal on it.
I suppose the case could be made that this administration is very transparent. After all, what is more transparent than the total absence of substance?
Paul
No comments:
Post a Comment