4 ms·

What? How would they know what their voting for?

justinlink 8y ago
It's a reference to something Nancy Pelosi said when passing Obamacare. "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it”.
- paulddraper 8y ago
  Often, that's literally true due to the length and complexity of the legislation. Which is why there is the proposed Read the Bills Act. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read_the_Bills_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read_the_Bills_Act
agensaequivocum 8y ago
Well, it's not like it's uncommon for Congress to drop a 1000+ page omnibus crap sandwich the night before the vote.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
amreact 8y ago
That's a quote from a Nancy Pelosi speech about Affordable Care Act. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pelosi-healthcare-pass-the-bill-to-see-what-is-in-it/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pelosi-healthcare-pass-the... For the record, Snopes does a good job explaining how Pelosi's statement was taken out of context by the right, especially when compared to Republican actions that were much more questionable regarding a somewhat (?) comparable Republican-sponsored bill called the American Health Care Act.
- paulddraper 8y ago
  That article (and it's rating of "Mixed") has puzzled me. The context "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." doesn't really change the way I think about her remarks. Controversy or not, it's a ridiculous assertion.
  - dfee 8y ago
    Snopes is actually quite partisan. This is a good example.
    - threeseed 8y ago
      Irrelevant. Most of the fact check checkers rate it as pretty accurate: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/fact_check_review/ https://www.realclearpolitics.com/fact_check_review/
      - simula67 8y ago
        It is relevant since they could be cherry picking facts to rate
      - read_if_gay_ 8y ago
        Who says so-called "fact checkers" aren't partisan?
        ashelmire 8y ago
        If you find reality to be partisan and people who are experts to be partisan, you’re the partisan.
      - meragrin 8y ago
        I'm not sure how it is irrelevant. The Pelosi statement "fact check" is pretty bad. They misleadingly state the ACA was passed by the House in October 2009. They neglect to mention the bill the House passed in October 2009 was titled “Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009”. They continue on to falsely claim Republicans of hiding the text of the American Health Care Act bill. Their claim was the draft was not posted until June 2017. A person can easily confirm the first draft of the bill was posted in March 2017 by a quick check on archive.org. They used this false claim to "illustrate" the Republicans are the shady party. They entirely ignore the Democrats took the House bill which had nothing to do with healthcare, replaced the entire text of the bill with an unrelated topic, and did everything they could to pass it because they knew they would no longer have the votes necessary if they waited on the House to pass it first. It is clear they were going out of their way to defend Democrats and demonize Republicans. I cannot expect any site publishing such garbage be much better with the rest of their content. I certainly cannot expect any site rating such a site as "pretty accurate" any where near unbiased. It really is sad to see these sites to sink as low as they have. They used to be decent.
masonic 8y ago
That's how Pelosi runs things. That's a faithful paraphrase of what she said before the ACA (Obamacare) votes. Neither the rank-and-file of either party not the Republican leadership got to see the ACA final bill contents before the vote.
- djur 8y ago
  It is a deeply misleading excerpt of something Pelosi said, not "faithful" in any way. And the claim that nobody got to read the ACA before the vote is simply not true. You can see the main bill being repeatedly debated and amended on the floor of the Senate from early October 2010 until late December here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/3590/all-actions https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/3590... The House passed the Senate bill several months later. It was then amended by the 2010 reconciliation act, which resolved some issues the House had with the Senate bill. That passed much more quickly (because it was a smaller and less controversial bill), but it still was presented on the floor of the House a week before it eventually passed: https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/4872/actions https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/4872...
  - DrScump 8y ago
    You can see the main bill But not the final bill, which is the only one that matters. Compare the early October version with the Chaptered (final) version.

It's a reference to something Nancy Pelosi said when passing Obamacare. "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it”.

paulddraper 8y ago
Often, that's literally true due to the length and complexity of the legislation. Which is why there is the proposed Read the Bills Act. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read_the_Bills_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read_the_Bills_Act

agensaequivocum 8y ago

Well, it's not like it's uncommon for Congress to drop a 1000+ page omnibus crap sandwich the night before the vote.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

amreact 8y ago

That's a quote from a Nancy Pelosi speech about Affordable Care Act. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pelosi-healthcare-pass-the-bill-to-see-what-is-in-it/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pelosi-healthcare-pass-the... For the record, Snopes does a good job explaining how Pelosi's statement was taken out of context by the right, especially when compared to Republican actions that were much more questionable regarding a somewhat (?) comparable Republican-sponsored bill called the American Health Care Act.

paulddraper 8y ago
That article (and it's rating of "Mixed") has puzzled me. The context "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." doesn't really change the way I think about her remarks. Controversy or not, it's a ridiculous assertion.
- dfee 8y ago
  Snopes is actually quite partisan. This is a good example.
  - threeseed 8y ago
    Irrelevant. Most of the fact check checkers rate it as pretty accurate: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/fact_check_review/ https://www.realclearpolitics.com/fact_check_review/
    - simula67 8y ago
      It is relevant since they could be cherry picking facts to rate
    - read_if_gay_ 8y ago
      Who says so-called "fact checkers" aren't partisan?
      - ashelmire 8y ago
        If you find reality to be partisan and people who are experts to be partisan, you’re the partisan.
    - meragrin 8y ago
      I'm not sure how it is irrelevant. The Pelosi statement "fact check" is pretty bad. They misleadingly state the ACA was passed by the House in October 2009. They neglect to mention the bill the House passed in October 2009 was titled “Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009”. They continue on to falsely claim Republicans of hiding the text of the American Health Care Act bill. Their claim was the draft was not posted until June 2017. A person can easily confirm the first draft of the bill was posted in March 2017 by a quick check on archive.org. They used this false claim to "illustrate" the Republicans are the shady party. They entirely ignore the Democrats took the House bill which had nothing to do with healthcare, replaced the entire text of the bill with an unrelated topic, and did everything they could to pass it because they knew they would no longer have the votes necessary if they waited on the House to pass it first. It is clear they were going out of their way to defend Democrats and demonize Republicans. I cannot expect any site publishing such garbage be much better with the rest of their content. I certainly cannot expect any site rating such a site as "pretty accurate" any where near unbiased. It really is sad to see these sites to sink as low as they have. They used to be decent.

masonic 8y ago

That's how Pelosi runs things. That's a faithful paraphrase of what she said before the ACA (Obamacare) votes. Neither the rank-and-file of either party not the Republican leadership got to see the ACA final bill contents before the vote.

djur 8y ago
It is a deeply misleading excerpt of something Pelosi said, not "faithful" in any way. And the claim that nobody got to read the ACA before the vote is simply not true. You can see the main bill being repeatedly debated and amended on the floor of the Senate from early October 2010 until late December here: https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/3590/all-actions https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/3590... The House passed the Senate bill several months later. It was then amended by the 2010 reconciliation act, which resolved some issues the House had with the Senate bill. That passed much more quickly (because it was a smaller and less controversial bill), but it still was presented on the floor of the House a week before it eventually passed: https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/4872/actions https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/4872...
- DrScump 8y ago
  You can see the main bill But not the final bill, which is the only one that matters. Compare the early October version with the Chaptered (final) version.