Waxman on 10,535 Pages of Obamacare Regs: ‘Is It Important That I Read It?’

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by mocgator, Oct 3, 2013.

  1. mocgator
    Offline

    mocgator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    6,511
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The ATL
    Ratings Received:
    +731
    No Waxy you complete dolt. Just use the usual talking points and blame Bush and call everyone against it racists...

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/waxman-10535-pages-obamacare-regs-it-important-i-read-it

    When asked by CNSNews.com whether he had read all 10,535 pages of final Obamacare regulations that have so far been published in the Federal Register, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) asked in return whether it was "important" the he read them, dismissed the inquiry as a "propaganda question," and did not ultimately anwer.

    CNSNews.com: "What I was going to ask you is if you've read those [10,535 pages] of regulations."

    Waxman said: “Have you read them?”

    CNSNews.com: "No. Have you read them?"

    Waxman said: “Is it important that I read it?”

    CNSNews.com: "Do you think that the American people should read it? I just asked you a very honest question. Whether you've read them? It's a yes or no question."

    Waxman: "I think it is a propaganda question, and I refuse to talk to you about it."
  2. icequeen
    Offline

    icequeen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    5,516
    Likes Received:
    2,400
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings Received:
    +4,141
    This sounds like folks that sign contracts without reading them, then something goes wrong, and then when they complain about it the person who wrote the contract says "you signed it!". Then the person protests like crazy, until they're shown some obscure line in a huge contract, which means they're bound to it, and then they scream "well I didn't know it was there! It's not fair."

    You sign it, it's legal. If you're going to attach your name to it, you'd better read it. All of it. That's what you're paid to do no matter HOW boring the reading is.
  3. GatorBen
    Online

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,191
    Likes Received:
    629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,482
    To answer for him, since he didn't really:

    No, it's not important for him to read them. And there frankly is no reason for him to.

    Why? That's the way delegating authority to administrative agencies is supposed to work.

    The entire reason legislation delegates authority to agencies to work out the details within broad statutory frameworks, is because Congress lacks the subject matter expertise to work out every minute detail, and if they tried to they would spend all their time doing so and never accomplish anything.

    So why, in god's name, would they delegate authority to the subject matter experts in an administrative agency to work out how a statutory framework actually gets implemented, and then waste a month reading it anyways?

    The administrative rules are not the work of Congress, he doesn't vote on them, once the bill is passed delegating authority to an agency to implement it Congress's job is done.
  4. LittleBlueLW
    Offline

    LittleBlueLW Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,162
    Likes Received:
    943
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +1,999
    So in essence our elected leaders are merely the face of the bureaucracy that really runs the show. That is so comforting to know.
  5. gatordowneast
    Offline

    gatordowneast Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,730
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +984
    Waxman is the perfect example of someone who absolutely could not do anything else. So naturally, we have him on the people's payroll.

    As a little kid, he was bullied and made fun of. Now, he thumbs his nose at the rest of us and shoots us birds.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,885
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,180
    Seems more comforting than Waxman et al taking a quick crash course in medical bureacracy & insurance and then drawing up detailed industry regulations themselves.
  7. icequeen
    Offline

    icequeen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    5,516
    Likes Received:
    2,400
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings Received:
    +4,141
    Then his answer should have been that he had staffers or experts read it and explain it to him, so he could make an informed decision. I would have no problem with that. The problem here is that there is a pattern of politicians, on both sides, not reading what they are passing. That is very worrisome.
  8. LittleBlueLW
    Offline

    LittleBlueLW Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,162
    Likes Received:
    943
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +1,999
    Not too comforting that the elected leaders cant smell a plate of crap when its right under their noses.

    I would expect a minimum level of competence in an elected leader that would completely reject the idea that we need 10k plus pages to implement one law. That in and of itself is enough to say 'back to the drawing boards'.
  9. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,885
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,180
    Maybe he should have, but the interviewer just wanted a "yes" or "no." It was a "propaganda" interview, and they would would have trolled him for the "yes" or "no" had he gone into a lecture about how the government works. I don't blame him for cutting it off.
  10. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,885
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,180
    Sorry, I just don't understand the obsession with page count and how that pertains to being a "good" or "bad" law, especially when you are attempting to implement reform of an already complex system involving many interconnected entities, both public and private.

    I mean, I would imagine tort reform or allowing insurers to sell across state lines would involve thousands of pages of regulations too.
  11. GatorBen
    Online

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,191
    Likes Received:
    629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,482
    He's not passing the regs, why would he need to have someone read them for him?

    Regulations didn't (and couldn't) exist until after the law was already in effect, and he doesn't have to vote on the regs.

    Agency regulations literally have nothing to do with Henry Waxman, he has no more reason to read them than I do (actually probably less because there's a chance I may actually need to know something in them for my practice).
  12. LittleBlueLW
    Offline

    LittleBlueLW Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,162
    Likes Received:
    943
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +1,999
    I personally would like the cliffs notes versions for all of them.

    It would have been simpler to go ahead and nationalize HC rather than this morphed thing called the ACA.
  13. secgator
    Offline

    secgator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    10,808
    Likes Received:
    362
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,050
    Why is that not surprising.
  14. DeanMeadGator
    Offline

    DeanMeadGator '63 Gator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    2,676
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +235
    I agree. What other legislation with such far reaching impacts has ever been passed when the Congress and the proponents of the legislation did not even know what was in it?

    The most preposterous statement I have ever heard when passing a bill is that "we won't know what's in it until we pass it."

    Surgeon to patient: "I won't know what this surgery will do until I've done it."
  15. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,885
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,180
    I don't know if blowing up the existing system up and creating something brand new would be "simpler." It might be more elegant, but certainly not simpler.
  16. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,885
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,180
    If that's what you heard, then you heard it wrong.
  17. LittleBlueLW
    Offline

    LittleBlueLW Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,162
    Likes Received:
    943
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +1,999
    Sometimes a mangled limb is better amputated than patched together with no idea whether it will be functional again.
  18. fubar1
    Offline

    fubar1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    5,565
    Likes Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Sherman Oaks, CA
    Ratings Received:
    +863
    I don't get hung up on page counts either. But the question the interviewer should have asked was..."did you understand the major tenents of the bill, including all new taxation, mandates, controls and penalties" before you passed it?

    That's a better, less partisan question and one that should have a "yes" or "no" answer by a Rep or Senator who voted on it.

    From Pelosi to Waxman, my educated guess of that answer is a resounding "no".
  19. LittleBlueLW
    Offline

    LittleBlueLW Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    6,162
    Likes Received:
    943
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +1,999
    Yes sir.
  20. icequeen
    Offline

    icequeen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    5,516
    Likes Received:
    2,400
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings Received:
    +4,141
    Valid and fair point. He could have then said that he read the bill/law and therefore didn't need to worry about the regulation language that was based on the bill/law he'd already read and voted on. That by reading the bill/law he knew enough but would leave the fine detail to the experts that it pertained to.

    I just don't like the non-answer.

    And my worry, as sais previously, is that a lot of the politicians aren't bothering to read what they're passing.

Share This Page