Now that the Senate and House are hammering out the final version of health care reform (HCR), should C-Span's cameras be allowed to view the process? President Obama vowed to open the doors of government and make the whole process transparent -- it was one of his central campaign themes. Personally, considering his stated philosophy, I can't see how he can keep the doors closed. However, I would like to get a better feel for the pros and cons.
Interesting question. I would be inclined to say "no" when you consider the vomit inducing spectacle of Lieberman panning for the cameras. On the other hand it would be interesting. On the also other hand the venality of it might lower the general voting percentage to only dedicated corporate types with direct financial interest in legislation. Tough to say.
Here is a video of President Obama's numerous comments about the need to televise the healthcare debate and negotiations on CSPAN. There is nothing confusing or unclear about his repeated, public remarks on this topic. <embed src="http://blip.tv/play/hJNRgZeudQI%2Em4v" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="364" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed> Make no mistake about it, if Barack Obama still considered it important that Congress conduct these meetings out in the open, and not behind close doors with only a very tiny number of participants, then the meetings would be televised and made accessible to the public. Apparently, he has changed his position on this now that he is in power. Barack Obama's promise to conduct healthcare negotiations on CSPAN is just one more lie that he has told the American people. Of course CSPAN should be allowed to cover these negotiations. Obama made promises far and wide that they would be broadcast. It was a central component of his campaign speeches. Now it is time to do what he said he would do. And the Congress will certainly do it, if the President insists.
I don't know if I would want to watch sausage or weiners being made, and this process may well be as unsavory. However, Obama was very specific on health care reform being completely open to scrutiny during the legislative process so that the public could see who was making deals with lobbyists, etc. etc.
I say yes. There's really no reason I can think of not to, other than various Senators potentially showing their ineptitude, in which case seeing that is probably a good thing so they won't get voted in next election.
By the way, is this about whether the cameras should be in there, or whether Obama is a liar? You've phrased it as a question about the pros and cons of C-Span being inside of it all, but then go on about Obama's promises which are irrelevant to the pros and cons.
I took it as a pro. I don't think Obama has decided to approve or disapprove the request. I was merely observing that from his campaign statements his position is clear.
It is about both, since Obama made such a significant issue out of this during the campaign. It is largely because of BO's promises on this topic that we are discussing this topic at all.
Those of us who voted for him have received a dedicated web link that allows us to follow the proceedings on the web.
I'm guessing Obama doesn't have much say as to whether Congressional debates are televised. They are a separate and co-equal branch of government. Shouldn't Senate and House leaders be deciding? I'm not to keen on the idea of televising it. The subject is already very politicized and I'd be worried that television would incentivize congressmen to grandstand instead of getting down to work. Besides that, C-SPAN is the most boring channel on television. So, if they televised it, I still wouldn't watch.
Obama is apparently promoting and endorsing this approach, and he is also expected to personally participate in it. [RQUOTER]Obama Prods Congress to Pass Health Bill (WASHINGTON) — President Barack Obama is prodding House and Senate Democrats to get him a final health care bill as soon as possible, encouraging them to bypass the usual negotiations between the two chambers in the interest of speed. Obama delivered the message at an Oval Office meeting Tuesday evening with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his No. 2, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., joined in by phone. They agreed that rather than setting up a formal conference committee to resolve differences between health bills passed last year by the House and Senate, the House will work off the Senate's version, amend it and send it back to the Senate for final passage, according to a House leadership aide, speaking on condition of anonymity in order to discuss the private meeting. Obama himself will take a hands-on role, convening another meeting with congressional leaders at the White House on Wednesday, the aide said. ....[/RQUOTER]
Obama is the titular head of the Democratic Party. One would think they would follow his lead. However, you are right -- the legislative branch should make its own decisions (but we all know that the President's party always looks to the President for leadership). Now, I lean toward allowing C-Span to televise the hearings for the same reasons Obama specified during the campaign. However, I also know I will not spend much time watching them push paper and parse the details so I am not feverish for a decision one way or the other. Not televising them, however, as TSchmal points out, makes Obama a liar.
this thread was owned by google results for "separation of powers" Teabaggers might be the stupidest force in american politics today. And that is saying something. Congrats.
It's germane if one knows the difference between Article I and Article 2 - but I'd expect nothing less from the "Get your gov't hands off my medicare!" r****dotroll 2000 persona you've got working here - my compliments. No doubt you will sucker somebody like rocketsjudoka into trying to patiently and unwittingly explain to you that there are different branches of government - and fun will be had by all. Congrats dude, as I said before I kind of admire your work on occasion. But it's not really that funny.
Personally I think yes they should but I don't think its a big deal. As for Obama promissing more openness in government I doubt he meant this particularly as he has no direct control over how Congress conducts their business.
Your attempts at obfuscation are apparent. JuanValdez made the separation point very clearly, and I responded to that. As usual, you are trying to take the thread into the wilderness to keep from addressing a question you fear.
