Bruce Braley Delivered The Closing Argument For ObamaCare At Nancy Pelosi’s Urging
DES MOINES – Iowans are well aware that Washington liberal Bruce Braley proudly supported ObamaCare, but what may be unknown to some is that he actually gave the closing argument in support of the damaging legislation.
At Nancy Pelosi’s behest, Braley successfully secured the votes necessary to pass ObamaCare – the very same legislation that contained $716 billion in cuts to Medicare, killed jobs and kicked Iowans off their healthcare plans.
“When Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi were desperate to pass ObamaCare, they turned to trial lawyer and Washington politician, Congressman Bruce Braley, to get the votes and deliver the closing argument, because he was uniquely qualified to argue in favor of a bill that raided $716 billion from Medicare, killed jobs and forced Iowans off their healthcare plans,” said Republican Party of Iowa spokesman Jahan Wilcox. “Congressman Braley unforgivably put the politics behind the Obama-Pelosi-Braley agenda ahead of promised benefits to our seniors, jobs in our state, and the health insurance policies for thousands of Iowans.”
After Securing The Votes For ObamaCare
In 2009, The Hill Reported That Braley Was Part Of Nancy Pelosi’s “Go-To Gang” To Help Whip Votes For ObamaCare. “Pelosi’s ability to unite Democrats and get the tough bills passed derives from her powers of persuasion and careful vote counting. And part of counting votes is knowing whom you can count on in a pinch. Here are some of the key Democrats Pelosi is likely to turn to as the voting on healthcare reform comes down to the wire, along with two hard-to-get votes…Rep. Bruce Braley (D-Iowa).” (Mike Soraghan, “Pelosi Has Go-To Gang On Big Votes,” The Hill, 10/28/09)
Braley Gave The Closing Argument For ObamaCare
On November 7, 2009, Braley Gave The Closing Argument On ObamaCare Before The House Voted To Pass The Law, Chastising Medical Liability Reform And Caps On Medical Malpractice Damages. BRALEY: “Mr. Speaker, during this entire health care debate, we’ve heard a lot from our friends on the other side of the aisle about something called medical liability reform, but all day as they’ve been talking about this point, you have not heard one word about patient safety. If you want to talk about real meaningful health care reform, it’s important to talk about the most critical aspect of true, meaningful health care reform-standing up for patients. Who will speak for the patients? Mr. Speaker, we know who will speak for the patients. We have the reports from the highly respected nonpartisan Institute of Medicine on patient safety. The first one is on patient safety, Achieving a New Standard for Care. The second one, Preventing Medication Errors, and To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. What did the Institute of Medicine tell us about the state of patient safety? They told us that the most significant way to reduce the costs of medical malpractice is to emphasize patient safety by reducing the number of preventable medical errors. They also told us that’s the only way we’re going to bring about meaningful health care reform. They also told us that medical errors kill as many as 98,000 Americans every year; and that, if it were ranked by the Centers for Disease Controls, would be the sixth leading cause of deaths in America. They also told us that every year there are 15 million incidents of medical harm in this country and that patient safety is indistinguishable from the delivery of medical care. That’s why they aren’t telling you about what the Institutes of Medicine reported the cost of medical errors is in this country. They reported in their studies that every year medical errors add $17 billion to $28 billion of cost, most of it in additional medical care that we end up paying for as consumers of health care. When you multiply that over the 10 years of this bill, that means it’s costing us $170 billion to $280 billion if we continue to ignore this problem. That’s why Democrats and the Institutes of Medicine are standing up for patients, and that’s why you should reject this motion to recommit. You hear our friends talk about what happened in California in 1976 when they put a $250,000 cap on payments for quality-of-life damages. What they don’t tell you is that the value of that cap today in 2009 is $64,000, and if you adjust that cap at the same rate of medical inflation, it would be worth $1.9 million. That’s what’s wrong.” (Rep. Bruce Braley, Remarks On The House Floor, 11/7/09; Congressional Record, 11/7/09, p. 12966-12967)
After Braley Gave His Final Comments On ObamaCare, Democrat Majority Leader Hoyer Urged Democrats To Reject The Motion To Recommit And Pass ObamaCare, After Which Votes Where Cast To Pass ObamaCare. HOYER: “I thank the gentleman for his comments. My colleagues, I ask you to reject this amendment. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle demanded 72 hours’ notice for the bill and they’ve gotten 4 or 5 months’ notice. They gave us 72 seconds to consider this amendment. This amendment deals with some very complicated subjects; and it provides, of course, as we are not surprised that it would, for substantial billions of dollars back to the insurance companies. That’s what their objective is. And, yes, they say something about equity of distribution of money. No study. We set up a very careful study to make sure that the people’s money is distributed to the States in an equitable, fair, effective fashion. That is why we ought to reject this amendment for which we received no notice, no consideration, no discussion in the public. The Republicans have been outraged about that. I ask our party, I ask each one of us, to reject this motion to recommit and pass this bill.” (Rep. Steny Hoyer, Remarks On The House Floor, 11/7/09; Congressional Record, 11/7/09, p. 12967)
Bruce Braley has been in Washington for 8 years and was recently in Texas for a political fundraiser where he belittled Senator Chuck Grassley for being just a farmer, with no law degree. Additionally, during the 112th Congress, Braley skipped 75 percent of the full Veterans’ Affairs Committee hearings.