Skip to comments.Ronald Reagan vs. Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Joe Biden and Barak Obama
Posted on 05/06/2013 9:45:18 AM PDT by Wuli
[no text, just the video clip]
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
It has Nancy Pelosi, condemned by her own words: "We have to pass the bill to know what's in it."
The truth is that to those who actually wrote the bill - behind the scenes - the important matters were not what you or I would call "policy" matters - like how would a particular regulation read. NO, the important matters to the authors of the bill have NOTHING to do with specific policies. The key importance to the bill, the core of the bill, the core value to them in the bill is simply the intrusion of the heavy hand of the Federal government into as much depth and breadth of the health care and health insurance sectors of the economy - period, mission accomplished. It is not about specific "solutions" other than the establishment of a law that makes the federal government the dictator of solutions.
That is why most of the specifics of the bill were not debated openly in Congress, because the specifics do not establish anything, definately except the control points, the choke points in dozens of new agencies and bureacracies that are to start dictating THEIR rules to everyone.
Will there be "democratic" debate over those rules? No.
The progressives and the Marxists have used the device of the regulatory state to slowly end the need for democracy. The only democratic act they need or care about is the one-time act of creating a new set of regulatory dictators so that the "experts" can do away with democratic debate as much as possible.
Federal regulatory agencies make up their own rules, publish them in the Federal Register as changes to United States law. In most cases Congress must take proactive action to change a new regulation issued by a Federal regulatory agency, or to prevent it from becoming law; otherwise, in most cases, the new regulation becomes law on the date the agency said it would in its final ruling on the new regulation.
In 99.99% of the cases, Congress takes no action at all, essentially, effectively rubber stamping what the regulatory dictators said would be new U.S. law; no democracy, no debate, no "representatives of the people assembled in Congress" weighing the merits and demerits of a new regulation. Just Congressional inaction, Congressional abdication.
And that's what the regulatory state is - abdication of the responsibility of the peoples elected representatives to appointed dictators who obtain their authority from one-time democratic acts that give it to them. This has been the progressive and Marxist tool in "democracies" all along. Use democracy often enough in ways that eliminate its further importance to the establishment of law.
Ping for later