2010 Obamacare: “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.”
2017 Trumpcare: “[we] have a right to know the full impact of this legislation before any vote in Committee or by the whole House.”
* * *
2010 Obamacare: “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.”
2017 Trumpcare: “[we] have a right to know the full impact of this legislation before any vote in Committee or by the whole House.”
* * *
Following Chuck Schumer’s denigration of ‘Trumpcare’ overnight, Nancy Pelosi has come out swinging this morning to press the same narrative to the American people: It “couldn’t be worse” she exclaimed on ABC’s ‘This Morning’
Here is what Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer had to say about the Republican’s plan for “TrumpCare” last night…
“Trumpcare doesn’t replace the Affordable Care Act, it forces millions of Americans to pay more for less care. This plan would cut and cap Medicaid, defund Planned Parenthood, and force Americans, particularly older Americans, to pay more out of pocket for their medical care all so insurance companies can pad their bottom line.
Despite US allies around the world seeking partnerships with Russia (most recently Japan’s Abe), it appears the Democrats simply cannot let go of the last meme standing between their loss in the election and a drastic reality check on the failure of identi5ty politics. Hours after Trump’s comments on Putin’s killing ways, Nancy Pelosi grandstanded on NBC’s ‘Meet The Press’ that “I want to know what the Russians have on Donald Trump.”
Following controversy over rehearsed questions and failed responses during her ‘townhall’ event this week – sponsored by CNN – it appears Nancy Pelosi was desperate to divert attention from Berkeley’s anti-free-speech riots back to The Left’s favored meme of the moment – Putin and Trump.
“I want to know what the Russians have on Donald Trump. I think we have to have an investigation by the FBI into his financial, personal and political connections to Russia and we want to see his tax returns so we can have truth in the relationship [with] Putin, whom he admires,” Pelosi said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
In other news:
– Democrats Rebel To Block Obama’s Trade Deals (Huffington Post, June 12, 2015)
– House Kills Fast-Track Of Obamatrade After Pelosi-Led Democrat Rebellion (ZeroHedge, June 12, 2015):
And just like that, President Obama’s fast track of his “great job creation” bill is defeated in a 126-302 procedural vote which stumbled over what is known as the Trade Adjustment Assistance.
Following Pelosi’s comments that “its defeat is the only way we will be able to slow down fast track,” and “people would rather have a job than assistance”, the defeat of a measure to provide aid to workers displaced by trade deals means the fast-tracking of the TPP is done (for now).
- *HOUSE HAS ENOUGH VOTES TO DEFEAT TRADE BILL
And with a whopping 302 votes against, House democrats just stunned the democrat president by ending the “fast-track” of the TPP and forcing it back to the drawing room table. As the NYT puts it:
– Nancy Pelosi to Democratic voters: Yes, it’s a ‘terrible year’ — but it’s your fault (Washington Post, Nov 7, 2014):
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi reflected on the Election Day losses with fellow Democrats, saying that it really wasn’t the party’s messages or platforms to blame — rather, it’s more the voters’ fault, she suggested.
Specifically, Mrs. Pelosi said during a 75-minute call with caucus members that the reason Democrats lost had nothing to do with party message and everything to do with voter turnout — and that if more Democrats had turned up at the polls, more Democratic candidates would have won, she said, The Hill reported.
Added: Jun 2, 2014
Air Date: April 3rd, 2014
You can’t make this stuff up!
Almost 11 million people couldn’t find a job in November, and for those who don’t earn a paycheck, unemployment benefits work for the economy, too, a leading Democrat says.
“Economists agree that unemployment benefits remain one of the best ways to grow the economy in a very immediate way,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (R-Calif.) said at a news conference on Thursday.
She spoke after Democrats held a hearing on the impending expiration of unemployment benefits — an “essential lifeline that millions of Americans and their families depend on,” Pelosi said.
Witnesses at Thursday’s hearing spoke “passionately” about the 1.3 million Americans who will lose the federal unemployment compensation on December 28 — “right in the middle of the holidays,” Pelosi said. And she said 1.9 million more Americans will lose their state benefits in the first half of next year.
“So it is absolutely essential that we extend the benefits.” Pelosi said she’d like to see unemployment insurance included in a budget bill — “but it could be separate from that as well.”
– Nancy Pelosi Gets Booed and Heckled by Supporters for NSA Support (Liberty Blitzkrieg, June 24, 2013):
You know it’s bad for the establishment when Nancy Pelosi gets booed and heckled by her own supporters at a progressive gathering in her home state of California. It seems the actions of the criminals in control of these United States finally have become so absurd that the apathetic citizenry is being shaken from its long slumber. While the process may be frustratingly slow for many of us, things are moving in the right direction at the grassroots level and the zeitgeist of the nation is changing for the better. Once again, we must be eternally grateful for the courageous actions of Edward Snowden, as his disclosures have forced us all to honestly pick a side between freedom and fascism.
From the Associated Press:
SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) — House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has disappointed some of her liberal base with her defense of the Obama administration’s classified surveillance of U.S. residents’ phone and Internet records.
Some of the activists attending the annual Netroots Nation political conference Saturday booed and interrupted the San Francisco Democrat when she commented on the surveillance programs carried out by the National Security Agency and revealed by a former contractor, Edward Snowden.
As she was attempting to argue that Obama’s approach to citizen surveillance was an improvement over the policies under President George W. Bush, an activist, identified by the Mercury News as Mac Perkel of Gilroy, stood up and tried loudly to question her, prompting security guards to escort him out of the convention hall.
YouTube Added: 16.08.2011
– Ron Paul Ad Compares GOP Field to Obama (ABC NEWS, August 16, 2011):
Following a weekend where Rep. Ron Paul’s campaign says he was virtually ignored by the press – the campaign is out with a new TV ad that takes aim at Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and Barack Obama labeling them as “smooth talking politicians.”
The ad “The One” has a very cinematic movie trailer feel to it and flashes between images of Perry, Romney, Obama, Michele Bachmann and Nancy Pelosi, suggesting they’re all the same. Ron Paul, the ad suggests, is the only different candidate in the race; he’s never voted for a tax increase, and he would end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“Ron Paul,” says the announcer, “the one who will stop the spending, save the dollar, create jobs, bring peace.”
It also suggests the other politicians represent rhetoric and division. It does not say how Paul, who votes against most bills on Capitol Hill, would represent a move away from division.
– Pelosi Predicts: $2.4 Trillion Added to Federal Credit-Card Limit Will Last Only 18 Months (CNSNews, August 02, 2011):
(CNSNews.com) – House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) is predicting that the $2.4 trillion that Congress has now added to the limit on the federal credit card–by increasing the legal debt limit–will be exhausted by the Treasury in only 18 months.
In a speech delivered on the House floor last night explaining why she favored the debt-limit bill, Pelosi repeatedly cited as one reason Democrats should join her in voting for it her belief that the new borrowing authority the bill grants the Treasury will last the government 18 months.
“And that’s another reason why I’m supporting this bill,” said Pelosi, “because the President was successful in impressing upon the Congress that we needed the full time, the 18 months so that we can have the Americans’ kitchen table, people sitting around that table and sitting around the boardroom table, would all know that you can rely on the United States of America to meet its obligations. Okay?”
(NaturalNews) Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Henry Hudson ruled that a key provision in Obama’s health care plan violates the US Constitution. The “minimum essential coverage provision,” Judge Hudson ruled, would force American consumers to buy a government-mandated insurance product whether they wish to buy it or not. There is no provision in the US Constitution that grants Congress the power to force consumers to buy into such a monopoly — the very idea seems ludicrous.
But not to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She believes that her power to force Americans to purchase whatever products and services the government wants them to buy is somehow granted by the Constitution.
In what is now seen as a curiously instructive question-and-answer exchange, one year ago Nancy Pelosi engaged in the following dialog with CNS News:
CNSNews.com: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?
Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”
CNSNews.com: “Yes, yes I am.”
CNS News goes on to report: (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/fla…)
Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told CNSNews.com that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a “serious question.”
“You can put this on the record,” said Elshami. “That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”
Absolute power need not explain itself
What’s clear from this exchange is that Nancy Pelosi believes Congress has absolute power over the people to simply invent whatever mandates, requirements or restrictions it wants, regardless of what powers were actually granted to the Congress under the US Constitution.
Do you remember the days when getting elected to Congress or choosing to work for the government was referred to as “public service”? The idea was that you would be making a sacrifice for the greater good of the country. Well, those days are long gone. Today, getting elected to Congress or working for the federal government is a good way to get rich.
Median household income in the United States fell from $51,726 in 2008 to $50,221 in 2009, and yet the personal wealth of members of Congress and the salaries of federal workers (especially at the higher levels) continue to explode. A lot of corrupt politicians and federal fat cats are raking in stunning amounts of cash, and we are the ones paying the bill.
There is certainly nothing wrong with making a lot of money, but does it seem right that so many of our “public servants” are getting filthy rich while so many of the rest of us are barely getting by?
Posted below are 12 facts that will blow your mind. Most Americans have no idea just how obscenely wealthy many members of Congress are, and most Americans are totally clueless about how cushy some of these U.S. government jobs are. If there is one place in America where the good times are still rolling (other than Wall Street), it would have to be Washington D.C.
Members of Congress and employees of the government are supposed to work for us. We are the ones who pay their salaries. But today, they are the ones “living the dream” while most of the rest of us scramble just to survive from month to month….
#1 According to an article in the Hill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s net worth soared from $13.7 million in 2008 to $21.7 million in 2009.
#2 In 2005, 7420 federal workers were making $150,000 or more per year. In 2010, a whopping 82,034 federal workers are making $150,000 or more per year. That is more than a tenfold increase in just five years.
#3 More than half of the members of the U.S. Congress are millionaires.
#4 The total compensation that the U.S. government workforce is going to take in this year is approximately 447 billion dollars.
#5 Today, all members of Congress earn at least $175,000. This is far, far more than the average American makes.
#6 60 percent of the federal government workforce is represented by labor unions.
#7 The median wealth of a U.S. Senator in 2009 was 2.38 million dollars.
#8 In 2005, the U.S. Department of Defense had just nine civilians earning $170,000 or more. When Barack Obama took office, the U.S. Department of Defense had 214 civilians earning $170,000 or more. In June 2010, the U.S. Department of Defense had 994 civilians earning $170,000 or more.
#9 Insider trading is perfectly legal for members of the U.S. Congress – and they refuse to pass a law that would change that.
#10 According to a recent study conducted by the Heritage Foundation, federal workers earn 30 to 40 percent more money on average than their counterparts in the private sector.
#11 When you factor in such things as retirement and health care benefits, the compensation gap between federal workers and private sector employees gets even larger. Just consider the following quote from the Heritage Foundation study mentioned above….
“Including non-cash benefits adds to this disparity. The average private-sector employer pays $9,882 per employee in annual benefits, while the federal government pays an average of $32,115 per employee.”
#12 The personal wealth of members of the U.S. Congress collectively increased by more than 16 percent from 2008 to 2009.
So can the U.S. government continue to afford to shell out nearly half a trillion dollars to federal employees every single year?
Take a look who really runs the Obama administration and has run all the other elite puppet administrations:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi holds one of the pens used by President Barack Obama to sign the health care bill, Tuesday, March 23, 2010, in the East Room of the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
(CNSNews.com) – When Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave her inaugural address as speaker of the House in 2007, she vowed there would be “no new deficit spending.” Since that day, the national debt has increased by $5 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department.
“After years of historic deficits, this 110th Congress will commit itself to a higher standard: Pay as you go, no new deficit spending,” Pelosi said in her speech from the speaker’s podium. “Our new America will provide unlimited opportunity for future generations, not burden them with mountains of debt.”
Pelosi has served as speaker in the 110th and 111th Congresses.
At the close of business on Jan. 4, 2007, Pelosi’s first day as speaker, the national debt was $8,670,596,242,973.04 (8.67 trillion), according to the Bureau of the Public Debt, a division of the U.S. Treasury Department. At the close of business on Oct. 22, it stood at $13,667,983,325,978.31 (13.67 trillion), an increase of 4,997,387,083,005.27 (or approximately $5 trillion).
Pelosi, the 60th speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, has added more to the national debt than the first 57 House speakers combined.
The $4.997-trillion increase in the national debt since she took the gavel is more debt than the federal government amassed from the speakership of Rep. Frederick Muhlenberg of Pennsylvania, who became the first speaker of the House on April 1, 1789, to the start of the speakership of Rep. Newt Gingrich of Georgia, the 58th speaker, who took up the gavel on Jan. 4, 1995.
The latest version of the CLEAR Act is slated for a floor vote in the House this week as Democrats look for ways to use the Gulf oil spill as a means to pass elements of their unpopular energy agenda.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stripped out authorization for an independent investigation into the Gulf disaster.
The Natural Resources Committee unanimously passed the amendment in committee markup July 14 offered by Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) that would establish a bipartisan, independent, National Commission on Outer Continental Shelf Oil Spill Prevention.
Unlike the commission set up by President Obama — packed only with environmental activists and no petroleum engineers — the commission unanimously approved by the Natural Resources committee would be comprised of technical experts to study the actual events leading up to the Deepwater Horizon disaster.
Not a single member of the committee voiced opposition at the bill’s markup. The Senate has also approved an independent commission.
“To investigate what went wrong and keep it from happening again, the commission must include members who have expertise in petroleum engineering. The President’s Commission has none,” Cassidy, the amendment’s author, told HUMAN EVENTS after the announcement. “It defies common sense that this amendment passed unanimously in committee, only to be deleted in the Speaker’s office.”
Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.), top Republican on the Natural Resources Committee said the Obama’s administration’s commission was set up to protect the President.
“By deleting the bipartisan, independent oil spill commission that’s received bipartisan support in both House and Senate committees, Democrats have shown they are more interested in protecting the President than getting independent answers to what caused this tragic Gulf spill. Some of the biggest failures that contributed to the Gulf disaster are the direct responsibility of the federal government and by deleting this bipartisan, independent commission, Democrats ensure that only the President’s hand-picked commission will be digging into any failures of his own Interior Department appointees. There is widespread agreement that no member of the President’s commission possesses technical expertise in oil drilling, and several are on the record in opposition to offshore drilling and support a moratorium that will cost thousands of jobs,” Hastings said.
The bill also sets up myriad regulations and new standards and laws for drilling that have nothing to do with offshore drilling.
“Even more outrageous is this bill’s attempt to use the oil spill tragedy as leverage to enact totally unrelated policies and increase federal spending on unrelated programs by billions of dollars. What does a solar panel in Nevada, a wind turbine in Montana, uranium for nuclear power, or a ban on fish farming have to do with the Gulf spill? Nothing — but the spill is a good excuse to try and pass otherwise stalled or unpopular new laws,” Hastings said.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she will ram the unpopular Senate health bill through the House without a vote. Article 1, Sect. 7 of the Constitution says she can’t.
Many House Democrats are reluctant to go on record in support of the Senate bill. Pelosi’s strategy is to “deem” it passed, go straight to a vote on a package of reconciliation “fixes” and then present both the Senate bill and reconciliation package to the president for signing.
In recent years, the US Supreme Court has twice struck down attempts to abbreviate the lawmaking process required by Article 1, Sect 7. Though it’s been used before on less controversial legislation, Pelosi’s tactic won’t survive a constitutional challenge.
* In INS v. Chadha (1982), the high court ruled 7-2 that lawmaking must follow the steps laid out in the Constitution. Foreign student J.R. Chadha (from Kenya, ironically) convinced the Immigration and Naturalization Service to suspend his deportation. The House, acting without the Senate or president, voted to overturn the INS suspension via a “legislative veto” — a device created by prior law to give either house of Congress the means to overturn certain executive decisions.
Chadha challenged the constitutionality of that arrangement and won. The Supreme Court ruled that the House’s action was “legislative” in nature — and declared that lawmaking is “subject to the procedural requirements of Art. 1, Sect. 7 for legislative action: passage by a majority of both houses and presentation to the president.” Anything less is unconstitutional.
Article 1 states: “The votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively.”
It’s getting better every day. Who needs Congress anyway?
(Washington Post) — After laying the groundwork for a decisive vote this week on the Senate’s health-care bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested Monday that she might attempt to pass the measure without having members vote on it.
Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers “deem” the health-care bill to be passed.
The tactic — known as a “self-executing rule” or a “deem and pass” — has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.
“It’s more insider and process-oriented than most people want to know,” the speaker said in a roundtable discussion with bloggers Monday. “But I like it,” she said, “because people don’t have to vote on the Senate bill.”
Republicans quickly condemned the strategy, framing it as an effort to avoid responsibility for passing the legislation, and some suggested that Pelosi’s plan would be unconstitutional.
“It’s very painful and troubling to see the gymnastics through which they are going to avoid accountability,” Rep. David Dreier (Calif.), the senior Republican on the House Rules Committee, told reporters. “And I hope very much that, at the end of the day, that if we are going to have a vote, we will have a clean up-or-down vote that will allow the American people to see who is supporting this Senate bill and who is not supporting this Senate bill.”
More on Obamacare: