Most Transparent Congress Evah Strikes Again: Liberal Democrats Hold Secret Meetings to Negotiate HCR Compromise

Pelosi made the promise, after the Democrats won a heavy majority in the House, that this would be "the most transparent" Congress of all time. Since then, Congress has been everything but transparent or post-partisan. In fact, things seem to have become worse.

Now, Pelosi and other liberal Democrats aren't just keeping the Republicans in the dark. They are keeping the more fiscally and socially conservative members of their own party from the negotiating table:

Despite their claims to the contrary, the way that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have handled the healthcare bill has been anything but transparent. And, if the left-wing blogosphere is to be believed, the two congressional leaders intend to keep the deliberations secret as they try to merge the House and Senate versions of the legislation into something that will pass both chambers.

The Talking Points Memo website reported Monday that Democrats in both the House and Senate are saying the process will likely follow the path of the House taking up the Senate-passed legislation, amending it and sending it back to the Senate, which will have to pass it again. "This process cuts out the Republicans," a House Democratic aide told TPM, indicating the congressional majority intended to make sure the Republican minority would "not have a motion to recommit opportunity."

It also, say those who are following the issue, allows Pelosi to avoid having to cut deals with problematic House Democrats like Michigan's Bart Stupak, who has promised to do what he can to scuttle the final bill if it provides for federal funding of abortions.

Henry Waxman, the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is saying much the same thing, according to David Dayen at FireDogLake, another prominent left-wing website.

Dayen reported that the powerful California Democrat told constituents he would be coming back to Washington Tuesday to begin negotiations with Senate leaders and the White House about what a final healthcare bill will look like—even though the House doesn't come back into session until January 12.

According to Waxman, the process for moving will not include the standard House/Senate conference committee, because the motions to select and instruct conferees in the Senate "would need 60 votes all over again." Instead, whatever agreements made could be packaged in an amendment to the bills passed by the House and Senate.

By blocking out the Republicans—not to mention House Democrats who object to what the Senate passed—Pelosi and Reid are setting up a protracted game of "ping-pong," in which the legislation goes back and forth from the Senate to the House and back to the Senate again. They may be able to prevail as far as the legislation goes, ultimately, but at enormous cost to their majorities. And that may be the biggest secret of all as far as the healthcare debate is concerned, or at least the one Pelosi and Reid are most concerned about.

Now, I don't really have any problem with this game of "ping-pong" that Pelosi and Reid are playing. It'll, hopefully, keep this monstrous bill from becoming law. Then, we can start over and create a bill that'll really make health care more affordable and available without having a negative effect on the quality of that care or "bankrupting" the country.

John Kerry: Health Care Bill's Too Complicated & Confusing To Post Online Before A Vote

Kerry tried to aim an attack on Republican senators, but it landed on the rest of the American public, instead.

Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, said during a Senate Finance Committee hearing Wednesday that the Republican push to start putting pieces of legislation online before they are put to a vote isn't as sincere at is might seem.

Republican senators on the committee were supporting a measure to put health care legislation on the Internet in a way that would be available to the public for three days before holding a vote on it, which upset Mr. Kerry. "

This is fundamentally a delay tactic," the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate said. "I mean, let's be honest about it. The legislative language, everybody knows, is relatively arcane, legalistic, and most people don't read the legislative language."

Apparently, the elitist liberal Democrat doesn't have much faith in the intelligence of the American people. Since the bill is in with "relatively arcane, legalistic" verbage, there is very little chance anyone can understand it. Therefore, most people won't even risk a migraine to try and read it. So why should we even bother reading it.

Don't forget, Kerry, one of Obama's main pledges during the campaign was transparency. In fact, Obama released a memo stating:

Government should be transparent.

Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing.  Information maintained by the Federal Government is a national asset. My Administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies should harness new technologies to put information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies should also solicit public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.

That means that you must "disclose (what's in the bill) rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use". After all, it's a "national asset". So, please, "harness new technologies (like the web) to put information about their operations and decisions (like any health care reform bill)online and readily available to the public.

Secondly, why are Democrats so afraid of the 72-hour wait that would give Americans time to decide whether they like it and tell their congressmen their thoughts on the legislation? It almost sounds like they're scared of what they might hear. After what they heard over the August break at the town halls, I guess I can't blame him too much for being scared, but it is against the policy of the Obama White House to do otherwise.

Besides, the public option won't go into effect for years, anyway. So, three extra days won't hurt anybody. In fact, during the campaign Obama promised five days of public viewing before the passage of any bill. So, if they only give us only three, they'll be getting off light.

Transparency Takes Another Hit Under the Obama Administration: Officials Softens Union Transparency

So much for the most transparent administration ever:

That news comes courtesy of federal disclosure forms that unions file each year with the Department of Labor. The Bush Administration toughened the enforcement of those disclosure rules, but under pressure from unions the Obama Labor shop is slashing funding for such enforcement. Without such disclosure, workers wouldn't be able to see how their union chiefs are managing their mandatory dues money.

They are obviously trying to cover up for their little buddies in the unions. It looks like all of money the unions gave to the Obama campaign is starting to really pay off. After all, Obama and the Democrats don't want to bite the hand that feeds their campaign war chest.

Quick Someone Get a Dictionary; Show Dems the Definition of "Transparency"

SURPRISE! Dems Break Promise: Stimulus Bill to Floor Friday
by Connie Hair
Posted 02/12/2009 ET
Updated 02/12/2009 ET

In a press conference Thursday, the House Republican leadership spoke candidly about being kept out of the House-Senate conference on the Obama-Pelosi-Reid so-called "economic stimulus" bill. They confirmed they had not yet seen the text of the bill as of 4 p.m.

Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he was unsure how many Democrats would vote with Republicans again on this bill but that he thought Republicans "may get a few" Democrats to side with them. The fact that the Demos have now broken their promise to have the public able to see the bill for 48 hours may drive more Dems into the Republican camp.

"[I] don't know, 'cause they haven't seen the bill either," Boehner said.

"The American people have a right to know what's in this bill," Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind) told HUMAN EVENTS after the press conference. "Every member of Congress -- Republicans and Democrats -- voted to post this bill on the internet for 48 hours, 48 hours ago. We'll see if the Democrats keep their word."

Actually -- as of 5:15 pm, the Democrats had broken their word. The stimulus bill -- which we still haven't seen -- will be released late tonight and will be brought up on the House floor at 9 am tomorrow.

The following statement was released by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer at 4:57 p.m.:

"The House is scheduled to meet at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow and is expected to proceed directly to consideration of the American Recovery and Reinvestment conference report. The conference report text will be filed this evening, giving members enough time to review the conference report before voting on it tomorrow afternoon."

Meanwhile, at an earlier presser Thursday, Pelosi -- while talking about legislation regarding school construction funds -- said it was vital to see the language of a bill before making decisions. ReadtheStimulus.org had the following quote:

"With all of this you have to see the language. You said this --- I said that --- I understood it to be this way --- you know, we wanted to see it in writing and when we did that then we were able to go forward."

"Around here language means a lot. Words weigh a ton and one person's understanding of a spoken description might vary from another's. We wanted to see it. And not only just I had to see it, I had to show it to my colleagues and my caucus. We wanted to take all the time that was necessary to make sure it was right."

Congressional members are also exchanging barbs via the popular social network Twitter. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) twittered, "Don't know when we're going to vote. Will the no votes delay vote just because they can? Speed is important. They know that."

House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) twittered back, "Those in favor of speed over commonsense may just be afraid of letting the People know what they are ramming through."

-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30697
-----------------------------------------------------------------

True to His Word?

President Obama has twice violated one of his campaign pledges about transparency. Wednesday he signed into law the State Children's Health and Insurance Program — or S-CHIP— three hours after the house approved the bill. Last week he signed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act two days after it was approved and that bill was not posted on the White House Web site until after he signed it.

But the Obama campaign Web site states, "As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the white house website for five days."
White House spokesman Tommy Vietor indicated to the Saint Petersburg Times, that the process is still being worked out. "The White House has posted legislation expected to come to the president's desk online for comment. We will be implementing this policy in full soon."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,489506,00.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My Thoughts

The Obama Administration promised numerous times to be open with American people and have transparency be a priority in his administration. However, Obama and the Democrats don't seem to be pracitising what they preach. They promised every one of us that we would be able peruse the massive "spendulus" bill 48 hours before it was voted on. Guess what? They lied.

Obama promised us a new era of transparency. However, he has routinely left the public out of the loop on his actions until it is already too late for us to voice our opposition, if we have any.

What are the Democrats trying to hide? What are they afraid of? Could it be that there is so much pork in there that it would stink up the Congress with the smell of government waste? Are they afraid that if we knew everything that they are doing, we would revolt against Democratic rule by voting them out in 2010 and 2012?

They don't want the people to know how poorly they are spending the people's hard earned money.