4 ms·

You linked a nine-second video and didn't even quote the entire thing. "But we have to pass the bill to find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controv

You linked a nine-second video and didn't even quote the entire thing. "But we have to pass the bill to find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy" What she was saying, which becomes more clear in the context of the full quote that you declined to provide, was that there was a lot of controversy and misinformation regarding the contents of the ACA; you may recall the term "Death Panels" being thrown around, for example. Trying to discuss the actual contents of the ACA had become impossible as a result of the density of misinformation and controversy, and Pelosi's point was that the only way to really find out what was in the bill, what effects the bill would have, was to pass it and then look at the actual effects on people. If you want to talk about bills which were passed largely without reading or understanding, there are better options in more recent history that don't involve misleading paraphrases.

throwaway84742 9y ago
The main complaint of GP was that people would vote by headlines. Which is exactly what our congresspeople do. WaPo estimates ACA to be 10k pages in total: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/how-many-pages-of-regulations-for-obamacare/2013/05/14/61eec914-bcf9-11e2-9b09-1638acc3942e_blog.html?utm_term=.4fee700e7268 https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/how-m.... If you want to tell me that even the majority of the people who voted for it gave it anything more than a cursory, headline level look, I have some fine Florida swampland I’d like to sell.
- CocaKoala 9y ago
  Then you should find a quote which supports that statement, instead of mischaracterizing one which doesn't.
  - throwaway84742 9y ago
    I think it does support it though. It’s a rare moment of lucidity and honesty from a congressperson. That’s how things really work when there’s a lot of effort required: just skip the effort and “may god bless the US” after it passes. Otherwise how do you explain that _affordable_ care act has nearly nothing in it about affordability? I have what looks to me like a plausible explanation: the only people who have actually read the whole thing are the lobbyists who wrote it.
    - CocaKoala 9y ago
      Except Pelosi wasn't saying that she personally hadn't read the bill; she was saying that discussion of the bill had become impossible because discourse had degraded so badly, and as a result the only way to get meaningful information about what it contained, to be sure that you weren't getting fed lies by one party or the other, was to wait for it to pass and see what effects it had. If you want to talk about bills which were voted on without being read, I recall a number of articles about the tax reform bill pushed by the Republicans; it was getting dropped on people's desks mere hours before the vote, with whole sections crossed out and notes written in margins. If you search, I'm sure you can find quotes from that time period about how it was impossible for people to read the complete bill and form an opinion on it before they were required to vote. You can also find quotes on the negative effects the rushed passage had, with loopholes and mistakes and unintended side effects that need to be addressed.
      - throwaway84742 9y ago
        I’m not singling out Democrats here. Both sides do it pretty much all the time.
        CocaKoala 9y ago
        > I'm not singling out Democrats here. Considering that you've tried to misrepresent Pelosi's quote multiple times in this conversation instead of bringing up an easy example where the thing you're allegedly mad about actually happened, I'm not sure I believe you.

throwaway84742 9y ago

The main complaint of GP was that people would vote by headlines. Which is exactly what our congresspeople do. WaPo estimates ACA to be 10k pages in total: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/how-many-pages-of-regulations-for-obamacare/2013/05/14/61eec914-bcf9-11e2-9b09-1638acc3942e_blog.html?utm_term=.4fee700e7268 https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/how-m.... If you want to tell me that even the majority of the people who voted for it gave it anything more than a cursory, headline level look, I have some fine Florida swampland I’d like to sell.

CocaKoala 9y ago
Then you should find a quote which supports that statement, instead of mischaracterizing one which doesn't.
- throwaway84742 9y ago
  I think it does support it though. It’s a rare moment of lucidity and honesty from a congressperson. That’s how things really work when there’s a lot of effort required: just skip the effort and “may god bless the US” after it passes. Otherwise how do you explain that _affordable_ care act has nearly nothing in it about affordability? I have what looks to me like a plausible explanation: the only people who have actually read the whole thing are the lobbyists who wrote it.
  - CocaKoala 9y ago
    Except Pelosi wasn't saying that she personally hadn't read the bill; she was saying that discussion of the bill had become impossible because discourse had degraded so badly, and as a result the only way to get meaningful information about what it contained, to be sure that you weren't getting fed lies by one party or the other, was to wait for it to pass and see what effects it had. If you want to talk about bills which were voted on without being read, I recall a number of articles about the tax reform bill pushed by the Republicans; it was getting dropped on people's desks mere hours before the vote, with whole sections crossed out and notes written in margins. If you search, I'm sure you can find quotes from that time period about how it was impossible for people to read the complete bill and form an opinion on it before they were required to vote. You can also find quotes on the negative effects the rushed passage had, with loopholes and mistakes and unintended side effects that need to be addressed.
    - throwaway84742 9y ago
      I’m not singling out Democrats here. Both sides do it pretty much all the time.
      - CocaKoala 9y ago
        > I'm not singling out Democrats here. Considering that you've tried to misrepresent Pelosi's quote multiple times in this conversation instead of bringing up an easy example where the thing you're allegedly mad about actually happened, I'm not sure I believe you.