Democrats vote down transparency of health reform bill
Provided by Senator Jon Kyl’s Press Office
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Senate Finance Committee today rejected, along party lines, a transparency measure introduced by Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) that would give Americans 72 hours to review the text of the Baucus health-care reform bill before it is voted on by the panel. U.S. Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl (Ariz.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, supported the measure and made the following statement:
For an issue as important as reforming the nation’s health-care system, surely we can wait a matter of three days so the American people can take a look at what we’re doing and if they really want us to approve it.
At some point, this bill will be melded, behind closed doors, with another health-care reform bill produced in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee. I doubt I’ll be part of that process, so my constituents aren’t going to have any representation in that room. That is not transparency, and that’s what gets the American people up in arms!
This is the argument that supporters of that process make: ‘It would be confusing for the American people to see exactly what this committee is voting on after all this time and to know how much it will cost because some unknown group of people is then going to take this product, go into a back room, and combine it with the HELP bill.’ Then, voila, we’re going to be expected to discuss the new bill immediately. Our constituents are going to ask, what on earth happened?
The American people are watching. This is the least we can do for the people we represent. They are our bosses, and they deserve to have some time to understand what we’ve done and how much it costs before this bill is mysteriously massaged into another bill and brought to the Senate floor.
PIN Question: Can anyone give a valid argument as to why the Democrats do not want this transparancy?
Your question: Can anyone give a valid argument as to why the Democrats do not want this transparancy?
I will try. The two hours of debate over this topic amounted to a debate over whether the “plain language” of the bill with a cost estimate or the “legislative language” of the bill with a cost estimate should be posted online 72 hours before a vote. The “plain language” version won. So, Democrats on the committee supported posting the bill for review with a cost estimate for 72 hours prior to a vote. The republicans were insisting that it must be the actual legislative language that is posted. Here is my own personal take on why the “plain language” version may be better. Given the fact that the legal wording of the legislative language is difficult to read, it is far more likely to be intentionally misrepresented the way some people continue to misrepresent the “death panels” that some prominent persons read into the legislative language of another committee’s draft bill. I think an argument could be made for posting BOTH the “plain” and “legislative” language forms together. Certainly if transparency is the goal, that would be best. Also, it is interesting to note that not even the senators on the committee work on the bill in its legislative language form – that would make it too difficult to read. Here is a draft of what they are presently working on (which any person can get by going to the senate website). http://finance.senate.gov/sitepages/leg/LEG%202009/091609%20Americas_Healthy_Future_Act.pdf In my opinion this was just a 2 hour stall by Republicans that are dragging this out in every way they can think of.
The plain language is nothing more that an elaborated talking points memo for healthcare that leaves too many gaps to be filled when it comes time to translate it into the legislative language, which because of this blockage, would be constructed behind closed doors.
It’s called smoke and mirrors which is why the republicans want BOTH to be displayed for 72 hours.
[...] That version does not have to be set up for the 72-hour public viewing, as the Democrats already blocked that amendment. In fact, it can be voted on immediately after construction, without being released to the [...]
I normally roam all over the internet because I have the tendancy to read often (which isn’t always a great idea because most blogs just copy from each other) but I have to say that yours contains some real substance! Thanks for stopping the trend of just being another copycat site!