Pass Bill - Then Find Out What's In It?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spoke at the 2010 Legislative Conference for the National Association of Counties (NACo) yesterday morning.  This audio clip shows her most intriguing statement made during the speech: “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy."  Is that how Congress works?  They pass bills “so that” the public can “find out what is in” them?  Or we may ask: Is the "fog" and "controversy" working for or against Pelosi's healthcare agenda (presuming it enables her to make comments like this and expect to be taken seriously)?

With remarks like this, it’s no wonder why Canada Free Press posted an article earlier today entitled: “Dear America, Admit That You’re Stupid! Love, Nancy”.  After criticizing Pelosi harshly, the author addresses the most important point of the controversy.  Namely, that this bill “will materially alter the relationship that” citizens have with the “government in these great United States”. 

Right before the comment— which you would assume was a slip-up but can never be certain— she said:

“You’ve heard about the controversies within the bill, the process about the bill, one or the other.  But I don’t know if you have heard that it is legislation for the future, not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America, where preventive care is not something that you have to pay a deductible for or out of pocket.  Prevention, prevention, prevention—it’s about diet, not diabetes. It’s going to be very, very exciting.”

“Prevention, prevention, prevention”?  I’m nervous to ask what this entails.  This government agenda doesn’t sound too “exciting” at all—at least, not in a positive way, as she implies.  According to Alliance for Natural Health, the Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010 proposed by Senator McCain was stopped due to “hundreds of thousands of messages” pouring “into the Senate opposing” the bill.  Is more legislation being drawn up to this effect?  How much control does the government want over our bodies and what we put into them?  Surely this isn’t the role of government our nation’s founders had in mind when they wrote the Constitution.

Perhaps new bureaus are to be created, monitoring our diet and individual health precautions.  This would explain how “health insurance reform is about jobs,” as she said.  The amount of jobs created will be an astronomical “4 million,” with “about 400,000 jobs [to be created] very soon.”  What exactly she has in mind is anyone’s guess.  I suppose we’ll have to wait until the bill is passed to find out.

Other highlights included bragging how the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act “has created or saved 2 million jobs.”  How many were created and how many were saved?  What would have been the outcome otherwise?  And why was it so pressing to pass a $15 billion jobs bill if hundred’s of billions are trickling down to our communities effectively already? 

She states that this new bill “will unleash tens of billions of dollars in infrastructure investment in your communities.”  How is this possible?  Oh yeah, fractional lending… but wait, doesn’t that lead to inflation (as if borrowing from the Fed wasn't bad enough)?     

For someone who says that “we need to focus on the next generation, not the next election,” it’s a wonder debt isn’t addressed more.  Even if the Act (and other bailouts) did help temporarily, it certainly isn’t sound economics.  It’s doubtful that the “next generation” will not be as grateful as she expects us to be now. 

With the John Dennis Campaign gaining momentum daily, she may have to start focusing on the “next election” sooner than she thinks.  Especially if she plans on undermining our intelligence with comments made such as the above.

Her speech can be found in full text on her website, posted as a press release.