CNSNews.com – Pelosi Won’t Give Public a Week to Review Text of Health-Care Bill Before House Votes on It — Whatever happened to the public review promises made by the Democrats? What gives?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi D.-Calif. will not give the public a week to review the final text of a health-care reform bill before it is voted on later this year.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid D.-Nev. has also declined to commit to giving the public a week to read and consider the final health-care bill.

At her press briefing on Thursday, Pelosi was asked whether the health-care bill would be handled differently than the stimulus bill, which came up in February. The 1,071-page final text of that bill was posted on the House Appropriations Committee’s Web site late on a Thursday night and then voted on the next day.

pelosi-goose




  1. RTaylor says:

    Lets assume the article is incorrect. Like another poster stated, what good comes from these public meetings. If you ever go to a local government meeting, usually only extremist gets up to shout out their agenda. The vast majority of the public is home watching TV, and don’t even know there is a public hearing going on. The existing healthcare industry will throw billions to hold up legislation that affects their bottom line. Don’t kid yourself that all MD’s want reform, they want more payment. There’s an old joke, “What’s the difference between God and a surgeon? God knows he isn’t a surgeon”

  2. Olo Baggins of Bywater says:

    Rtaylor, you’re right. If it’s the same old regular rabblerousers then who cares. But when there’s a large public outcry for a specific issue that wasn’t there before, then the officeholders need to listen.

  3. Don Quixote says:

    How many of you would or even have the ability to read a house bill this large.

    Like John, you would only know what Limbaugh or Fox’s opinions of it are, and we already know that.

  4. Nimby says:

    Hey, Scott. Just a small bone to pick with your find of the Health Care bill: it’s a draft for discussion. NOT anything even close to what they will be voting on. I heard on CNN, I think, the current draft is nearing 1,200 pages. That’s half again as long as the draft posted. What in the world could they be thinking of that needed another 400 pages to cover? Scary. But the truly frightening part will be the amendments! You know what amendment I would like to see? I’d like to make it illegal for any Congessperson to vote on any bill they have not read from cover to cover – personally. Not six staffers each reading 200 pages and then reporting what they found. Also, the OMB or IG or some agency should prepare a simple, say 20 question, multiple choice quiz based on the main points of the legislation. All lawmakers will have to pass the quiz before being allowed to vote on it.

    By the way, just skimming through, I was amazed at how many reports to Congress are required especially since there is an exemption to the paperwork reduction act! Can you count the forests that will be sacrificed for this plan?

  5. JimR says:

    RE: # 27 Misanthropic Scott, … well there it is, all 850 pages. I would be thanking you if I weren’t Canadian. Question is… how many true blue non-government, non-media, Americans will actually bother to read it? Of those, how many will understand it? Of those, how many will care to critically analyze it. And finally, of those, how many will bother to present any concerns back to the office of Pelosi?

    My guess is we’ve lost 99% of Americans on the first question. Canada would fare no better. Sad.

  6. #34 – Nimby,

    Presumably, we will get a new version on the web when enough people agree to it. As for requiring politicians to read the bills they sign, I think no one would ever be able to sign another bill.

    This might be a good thing.

    Certainly, PATRIOT Act could not have been signed in a matter of hours, if at all.

    How many politicians can read? How many can keep their attention focused on anything long enough to read a doc of this size?

    #35 – JimR,

    Hell, even I’m going to wait for a reputable analysis of it. I’ve got better things to do than wade through that beast. Unfortunately, that will leave most of us getting out analysis from biased news organizations of either side. Correction, most will get their “analysis” of the situation from a 30 second sound bite.

  7. LibertyLover says:

    #36, Correction, most will get their “analysis” of the situation from a 30 second sound bite.

    Amen.

    Just like the Patriot Act, Bush’s Bailout, and Obama’s Stimupork.

  8. Rick's Cafe says:

    #35
    Didn’t read it? That’s why there are experts who’s job is to do just that….including the elected officials.

    In some respect that is a cop-out, but then I don’t personally know anyone who’s read all of the tax code, or even most of it.

    It’s a rotten mess that we’ve allowed ourselves to get into.

  9. DHZ says:

    Just one question…

    Where’s the transparency?

  10. Sea Lawyer says:

    #38, Rick,

    And when all else fails, towing the party line is a sure winner.

  11. MoreGruelPlease says:

    Wouldn’t it be nice to live in a world where, if lawmakers aren’t given sufficient time to read a bill all the way through, they would simply and collectively refuse to vote on it?

    I would think that voting on a bill you didn’t read would leave you open to attacks from your opponents come re-election because you vote on things you don’t know anything about because you didn’t read them. I would think the mere threat of this would be enough to keep this from happening.

    I’m just an idealistic nutjob, I guess.

  12. Interestingly, the entire constitution is far shorter than this bill and probably all others as well. Perhaps we should instate a law that no single bill can be longer than the constitution.

    I also think that laws should have expiration dates to be decided on at the time they are passed with a maximum of around 25 or 50 years. If it’s a good law, it will be extended. If it’s a serious case of civil rights, it should probably become an amendment to the constitution.

  13. LibertyLover says:

    #42, Perhaps we should instate a law that no single bill can be longer than the constitution.

    I was real close to posting something similar but couldn’t come up with a reasonable length.

    The Constitution makes a perfect ruler. Thanks.

    Now we just need to keep from 5,000 amendments to make it longer . . .

    I also think that laws should have expiration dates to be decided on at the time they are passed with a maximum of around 25 or 50 years. If it’s a good law, it will be extended. If it’s a serious case of civil rights, it should probably become an amendment to the constitution.

    I agree. You call your congressmen/senators and I’ll call mine. Maybe we can build support for this.

  14. Kasi Codding says:

    This made me smile and hopefully after your last post it will do the same for you:

    Two wrongs don’t make a right, but two Wrights made an airplane. 🙂


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 13597 access attempts in the last 7 days.