Over 150 senators and congressmen signed the “Responsible Healthcare Reform Pledge,” promising: “I pledge to my constituents and to the American people that I will not vote to enact any health-care reform package that: 1) I have not read, personally, in its entirety; and, 2) Has not been available, in its entirety, to the American people on the Internet for at least 72 hours, so that they can read it too.” Like all of his Democratic colleagues, Louisville’s congressman, John Yarmuth (Dem., Ky. 3rd Dist.), refused to sign the pledge.
The ObamaCare law—all 2000+ pages of it—was drafted behind closed doors, in secret meetings with lobbyists and rushed through congress in a late session vote. Then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi famously said, “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it,” and not a single congressman had the temerity to come forward and claim that he actually read the ObamaCare bill before voting for it.
Now that the American people are “finding out what is in it,” they don’t like what they see, and numerous federal courts are ruling that major portions of the ObamaCare law are unconstitutional.
And today, the public interest legal group, Freedom Watch, announced that Judge Richard Roberts, of the U.S. District Court for District of Columbia, ruled in favor of allowing the group access to secret White House meetings with lobbyists in the healthcare and related industries over the President's so-called ObamaCare legislation, and learn whether there has been a change in the "composition" of the group of persons and entities with whom the President and his advisers had been meeting.
Previously, in the months leading up to the controversial ObamaCare legislation, the President and his staff had met secretly with lobbyists from Planned Parenthood, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a host of other special interests seeking to influence the White House and the Democratic Party to craft the bill to their liking.
In Civil Action No. 09-2398, Freedom Watch vs. Obama, Judge Roberts gave the parties until September 26, 2011, to advise the court whether President Obama and his colleagues were still meeting with healthcare lobbyists and whether the case may be moot if they are not.
Larry Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch, responded to Judge Roberts’ ruling by stating: "Clearly, whatever the White House tells the court will be carefully scrutinized, as it is more than likely that they are still meeting and consulting with lobbyists given the complexity, controversial nature, and political ramifications of its implementation -- particularly during a year leading up to the 2012 presidential and congressional elections. Too much is at stake for this not to be occurring. It’s just a shame and an affront to the American people that a president who proclaimed that he wanted more transparency in government has chosen to fight tooth and nail to keep his communications with lobbyists secret. This ruling is a huge victory for the American people's right to know what their government is doing behind closed doors. In the current economic climate, where Obamacare will prove to be a huge cost to the nation as it faces more economic peril and deprivation, this case takes on huge significance."
In recent weeks we have learned that ObamaCare—contrary to specific assurances from the President himself—will not only provide free medical care for illegal aliens, but will also provide free “morning after” pills; a form of early-pregnancy abortion. Slowly but surely the courts are turning over the slimy rock under which ObamaCare was hatched.
It’s like Louisville’s own Justice Louis D. Brandeis once said: “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”
For your own copy (13 Pp. .PDF) of Judge Roberts’ opinion, CLICK HERE
Louisville.com's The Arena section features opinions from active participants in the city's politics. Their viewpoints are not those of Louisville.com (a website is an inanimate object and, as such, has no opinions).