|
|
 Ask The Speaker!
Welcome to the Netroots Nation question submission page for the Saturday morning (July 19, 9:00am) keynote session "Ask The Speaker." The event empowers citizens to engage America's current House Speaker in substantive discussion about current issues, the legislative process, and how citizens can participate in their government. Instead of simply giving a speech at a podium, Speaker Pelosi will be taking your questions and interacting with convention attendees. The 9 a.m. keynote will be moderated by Gina Cooper, Netroots Nation's Executive Director, and Jeffrey Feldman, author and blogger. But it all begins right now, right here, when you submit your questions and vote on questions submitted by others.
Want to ask the Speaker a question?
Our time with the Speaker will be brief, so to make the most of it we have created a system for gathering as many questions as possible from across the netroots. Want to submit a question? Here's what you do:
- Take A Quick Look Around First: Before you submit your own question, read around to see that the site has been divided into categories to help organize the submissions and elicit as wide a range of ideas as possible. Also, take a quick peek at what's already been submitted.
- Click on "New Idea" To submit a question start by clicking the big orange button that says "New Idea." You will be asked for a valid email, and then taken to a basic comment submission form.
- Formulate a Concise Question: Keep in mind that a question is a single sentence with a question mark at the end of it--preferably a sentence that can be spoken in one breath. If your question has chapter headings ; ) consider (1) revising it to make it shorter and more concise and/or (2) dividing it into multiple submissions. What makes for a great question? Try for a question that invites the Speaker onto new terrain having to do with policy, campaigns, or democratic engagement. Questions that invite the Speaker to admit failure on a past issue are not off-limits, but they will likely be folded into other submissions to create more vibrant starting points for a back-and-forth.
- Hit "Submit" : Once your questions is written, submit it and your job is complete! Feel free to submit as many questions as you have in as many categories as you like.
- Vote Up! Vote Down!: The final step is one that every blogger knows well: recommending. Our system has a built in voting system not unlike Digg or Reddit. All you need to do is vote a comment up or down and everyone (including the moderators) will get to see which questions sit best with the most blog readers and conference attendees.
What Happens After I Submit My Question?
Prior to the conference, the moderators will print out all the questions and the vote tally, and then pull together a list of questions to pose to Speaker Pelosi during her keynote. Some questions will be posed exactly as they were submitted, some will be edited down, some will be combined with others. The final result will be a set of questions based entirely on open-source contributions from blog readers across the netroots--progressive democracy in action and delivered to the third most powerful member of our government.
|
Got an Idea/Suggestion?
|
Browse
|
|
|
Given that the constitution calls for impeachment if high crimes or misdemeanors have been committed, and the current president has flouted constitutionally mandated checks and balances, why is impeachment off the table? How do you intend to not give him free reign if you remove one of the only constitutionally given ways of limiting a president's abuse of his authority?
|
|
|
Posted by tim 07/07/2008 12:00 AM PDT Since Rove, Myers and Bolton have all ignored subpoenas made by House committees, when do you plan to arrest these fugitives and force them to comply?
|
|
|
Corporate donors are shifting their political giving dramatically to Democrats in Congress. Sen. Barack Obama's small donor "revolution" is a promising development, but 90% of the money given to congressional candidates still comes from larger donations. Will you make passage of a public financing law that provides incentives for small donations a priority in the next Congress?
|
|
|
Posted by james 07/10/2008 12:00 AM PDT Every day in the U.S. 10,000 young people get an STD, 2,400 become pregnanct, and 55 contract HIV. The Bush administration has pushed abstinence-only sex education programs that prohibit information about condoms and birth control. Why are you on record supporting Chairman David Obey's continued funding for these programs when your own congressional evaluation showed they have "no impact on teen behavior" and a report by Congressman Waxman showed that 80% of abstinence-only curricula contian "false or misleading" information. What possible rationale could exist for the Democratic congressional leadership promoting ignorance in the era of AIDS?
|
|
|
I'm curious how any Democrat, much less any member of Congress, considered their oath of office to uphold the Constitution before they voted to allow for telecom immunity in the service of warrantless, secret, illegal and unconstitutional searches of our phone calls.
As the Bill passed under your stewardship, clearly not many did. What a disservice to the citizens of your district and to the country overall.
|
|
|
Posted by cokane 07/07/2008 12:00 AM PDT If impeachment doesn't happen while President Bush and Vice President Cheney are in office, would you support Investigation into criminal activity after they are out of office? How would such a prosecution work?
|
|
|
If George Bush and Dick Cheney have not committed impeachable offenses, then just what is an impeachable offense?
|
|
|
Posted by abra2345 07/07/2008 12:00 AM PDT The single most important task of Congress is to protect and defend the Constitution. A strong Constitution protects the Nation, and thus We The People and as such, is paramount for our national security. Congress is the voice, the will, the protector, and the conscious of We The People. Given the Congress' acquiescence to all measure of executive overreaching for the past 7-1/2 years, what will the Congress finally do to restore the balance of power by reigning in a near-unitary executive, by holding them to account for any crimes committed against the Constitution and against We The People, and by using punitive measures to prevent such crimes from ever happening again? Given the past 7-1/2 years, what assurances can you give us that crimes against the Constitution and the American people will not be swept under the rug to be repeated by a future administration, dangerously emboldened by history's precedent of getting away with it?
|
|
|
If private insurance is given a place in universal health care, a lot of money will go to their profits, overhead, waste, etc. We already have the most expensive health care system in the world. If we cut out the health insurance companies, the savings can be used to take care of sick people. It works better. Medicare is a success with low overhead and is cheaper than Medicare
Advantage, the private insurance scam that was forced on us by the Republicans.
Please comment on why Single Payer gets no serious consideration in Congress.
|
|
|
There has been a lot of discussion about universal health care in the Democratic primary, but little word from those in Congress regarding the future of such legislation. Do you think Congress will be able to pass universal health care with a Democratic President in the White House, and how long will it take to make that happen?
|
|
|
Posted by mowder 07/07/2008 12:00 AM PDT It has become fairly apparent to all Americans that the budgets of defense and homeland security are gigantic boondoggles, designed to funnel money directly to the GOP and its supporters. The corruption larded throughout this Administration's history has not only eliminated our 2000-era surplus, but has impoverished our nation.
We are told we cannot invest in health care, education, retirement, energy research, infrastructure care - even federal firefighting! - because we are so broke.
If this were a business, the stockholders would demand a full investigation, complete with forensic accountants, to trace and recover these stolen funds, no matter where they were hidden. We cannot allow the criminals who have broken this nation to escape with their loot intact!
Can you detail how you plan to uncover the extent of these massive thefts, and use the full force of the US government to get the people's money back? Only recovering our ill-spent taxes can give us the funds we need for the future.
|
|
|
Madam Speaker, as one of your constituents in San Francisco, I have supported you at the polls for many years, and was proud when you became Speaker of the House.
Could you please restore our hope in the rule of law, and give us a sense of how the Democratic Congress will act to hold criminals in the Bush administration accountable for their illegal acts? With the judicial and executive branches of government ignoring their duty to the constitution--or worse, furthering the lawless "unitary executive"--we the people are counting on Congress to defend the Republic.
|
|
|
In order to restore a three-branches-of-government-style democracy/republic, BUSH/CHENEY MUST BE IMPEACHED! We are paying you to defend our Constitution, and you are failing miserably by ignoring this administration's many crimes. We've lost so much...how can you sit by while Rove and others IGNORE a Congressional subpoena? How could you pass that awful FISA law? Don't you see how this executive branch is grabbing unprecedented power? This is a TURNING POINT IN U.S. HISTORY. DO THE RIGHT THING!
BTW, is there a worse crime imaginable than deliberately lying to start a war in which hundreds of thousands of people die? Please tell me what crime is worse! It's mass murder. Where is your conscience?
|
|
|
Posted by neroden 07/07/2008 12:00 AM PDT The Democratic Congress of 2006 was elected on a clear anti-Bush mandate. Unfortunately, you seem to have misread that mandate. You have apparently been making it a priority to pass any legislation, even if it's bad Bush-backed legislation, rather than making it a priority to *stop* the worst Republican schemes.
You bottled up impeachment hearings, and you failed to use inherent contempt on subpoena-violators, but more importantly you passed the warrantless wiretapping law, every Iraq spending request, and several other bills which the majority of Democrats opposed very strongly. We know that you had the power to stop at least some of those, using your agenda-setting powers. The Republicans used those powers to stop our bills.
Can we trust you, in future, to start using your powers as Speaker to at least prevent the worst of the worst legislation? Why should we trust you to do so? Why shouldn't we ask our Representatives to elect a different leadership?
|
|
|
Posted by ianccree 07/11/2008 12:00 AM PDT The Bush administration has committed numerous crimes - felonies, not misdemeanours, and has been responsible for the deaths of millions of people as well as the heinous cruelty of torture of many innocent people. Bush, himself, is literally supporting terrorism in Iran by supporting the MEK which has been bombing several locations inside Iran.
He is working hard to justify a war against Iran and may well begin such unexpectedly without any authorization from Congress. If he does, there will be war in the entire Middle East, and then globally. This war will almost certainly become a nuclear war with ensuing radioactivity of the whole planet and the end of all life on earth.
It is your sworn Congressional duty to Impeach for these horrendous crimes and gross violations of the Constitution.
Congress has a duty of oversight of the executive branch. Such oversight has been woefully conspicuous by its absence, in spite of repeated promises of holding the Bush administration accountable.
There is no time to lose if we want to survive!
If we do not act now, it will be too late. War against Iran will likely begin just before the November election or shortly after, certainly before Barrack Obama takes the oath of office as president.
Now there is no time to dream about bipartisanship!
Will you fulfill your duty?
Ian Campbell Cree, MB(Hons.), MS, FRCS(Eng. & C.), FACS, LRCP.
|
|
|
When are you going to hold Bush and Cheney accountable for breaking the law, for ignoring requests for documents, for using executive priviledge when it doesn't apply, for its incompetent handling of every domestic or foreign policy?
|
|
|
Posted by Call Up 07/10/2008 12:00 AM PDT Why haven't you investigated this? Bush's entire excuse for spying on Americans was that he was trying to protect us from the terrorists who attacked us. But the spying started well before that and you don't seem to care about that fact!
What possible reason would the neo-cons (with the assistance of the telecoms) have had for spying on Americans in violation of the law prior to 9-11?
|
|
|
When the Republicans led Congress, they were quite successful, using procedural and political tactics, in blocking the Democratic Party's agenda.
Why is it that the Republican Party, now the minority, seem to maintain this power? Allowing the minority party a seat at the table may seem like the civil and polite way to govern, but it has resulted in the public perception of a deadlocked, do-nothing Congress, or worse, one in which the majority party capitulates to the minority party even when polling shows that the majority party has the backing of the majority of the population. What have you done to alter this perception?
|
|
|
I can't seem to find the clause anywhere that gives her the power to decide this. Rep. Kucinich has done everything "by the book" and impeachment should be moving forward. Why is Pelosi trying to impead what should be her consititutional duty.
|
|
|
When will Karl Rove be arrested for failure to show up?
|
|
|
I see no provision in our constitution allowing for private armies. We have five branches of military and they must follow certain laws, even in combat. It costs many times more to have private companies perform tasks that are the realm of our military.
What are you doing to stop the use of private armies? What are you doing to insure they follow our laws and the laws of the country they operate in? What are you doing to hold them accountable, both in the billions of dollars we have paid them, and accountable for laws they have broken (murder comes to mind, torture too)?
|
|
|
Posted by hedgerml 07/10/2008 12:00 AM PDT Speaker Pelosi,
More Americans are dying daily due to either a complete lack of Health Insurance or having coverage of procedures and drugs denied by their "for profit" insurance companies than are dying in the war in Iraq.
Why then has the Democratic congress not moved forward with a Single Payer Universal Health Care plan for all Americans?
Also, Will you commit to leading this fight in the next congress and if not please explain why the deaths of thousand of Americans don't matter?
Finally, should you not be able to push Single Payer Health Care through will you at least require in any compromise bill that any insurer who denies coverage of a physician requested action or prescribed medication is committing a felony resulting in a minimum of 10 years jail time to the CEO/President of the company?
|
|
|
Posted by joann 07/09/2008 12:00 AM PDT Madam Speaker,
Re Rove's likely refusal to appear before the House tomorrow, it's been reported that your communications director Brendan Daly sent (Huffington Post) the following statement:
Those reports are completely untrue -- the Speaker has not urged the Judiciary Committee not to seek contempt charges against Karl Rove. The committee can seek a contempt citation if it decides to do so. (Fyi, Henry Waxman's Oversight Committee is looking at a contempt citation against the attorney general over documents. The Speaker has no objections to that -- it's the committee's decision.)
A source with the House Judiciary Committee also denied Pelosi was opposing contempt charges.
-----------------------------------------------------------
In view of your office's lukewarm statement, my question to you is do you SUPPORT contempt charges? Please elaborate. Extra points for your opinion of Rove's role in the prosecution of Dem. Gov. Siegelman-Alabama.
|
|
|
Will you give up you congressional health care benfits and purchase health insurance in the private market, as over 40 million americans are expected to do?
|
|
|
Posted by o7 07/13/2008 12:00 AM PDT Why won't you let the impeachment of these two go forward? There are 10's of thousands of Americans that want them impeached. Look at the lying the spying the acconomy, the war, all of the stuff they have done to the American people. You most let the impeachment go forward. Why won't you?
|
|
|
Madam Speaker:
Forgive my legislative ignorance, but after pulling out an 8th grade Civics book from the early 1970’s, it is well known that the Constitution provides that "All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives."
As a result, the Senate does not have the power to initiate bills imposing taxes. Furthermore, the House of Representatives holds that the Senate does not have the power to originate appropriation bills or bills authorizing the expenditure of federal funds. Therefore any funds appropriated for the Iraq War must start as a bill in the House of Representatives of the United States Congress.
My assumption is that you have some political control over John Murtha (D-PA) who chairs the House Defense Appropriations Committee in the 110th Congress and the Democratic majority on this committee. This committee had a Democratic majority of nine Democrats and six Republicans.
I am baffled on how you as the Speaker of the House could NOT prevent ANY Iraq War funding bill from being killed at the committee level before it ever reached the House for a vote. It seems logical to me that no war funding means NO MONEY, which means withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. This was a similar tactic during the early 70’s in the Vietnam War.
Please enlighten me on House legislative procedure and why this tactic was not used as a means to bypass the myriad of war funding bills you helped put before the President of the United States.
Please explain how one of the lowest rated Presidents in the history of the United States got every dollar he wanted to wage war in Iraq.
|
|
|
Posted by edified 07/07/2008 12:00 AM PDT Is there any bill now pending that would force electronic voting machines to produce a paper trail, and/or otherwise protect the integrity of elections. If so, when will it come to vote? If not, why not?
|
|
|
Posted by joann 07/08/2008 12:00 AM PDT If not, why not?
This should be an interesting week.
|
|
|
There is no way to verify the results of election results when electronic equipment is used to count the votes. Any computerized tabulation can easily be manipulated to influence the results of any race or issue. Even paper vote scanning machines can be tampered to skew the true will of the people. The arguement against hand counted paper ballots that it is too time consuming and too expensive just doesn't work if the ballots are counted by poll workers at the precincts. Would you consider supporting a national requirement to have all federal races be tabulated as a paper ballot by poll workers at the precincts?
|
|
|
If you could take impeachment off the table, why could you not take a FISA bill with immunity off the table?
|
|
|
If you'll take impeachment off the table for a president who's committed war crimes, what would a president have to do for you to impeach him?
|
|
|
(Follow-up to "why no impeachment?)
Speaker Pelosi, our country TORTURED people. We illegally invaded and occupied a sovereign country based on lies. The damage to our international standing, our moral authority to speak on atrocities in Sudan, Zimbabwe, Myanmar and elsewhere, has been profound and may be irreparable. You say impeachment or prosecutions for the architects of these crimes is "off the table", and today (I assume) you will give your reasons for that.
Given those reasons, will you support and implement a Truth and Reconciliation process that at least investigates these crimes and provides a framework for acknowledgement, repentance and reparations to the victims of these crimes, even if punishment is "off the table"?
|
|
|
Posted by ianccree 07/14/2008 12:00 AM PDT If G.W.B. tries to start a war on Iran, will you ask Congress to oppose him and cut off all funding which could be used for this purpose?
If he starts a war without the approval of Congress, will you impeach him or have him arrested for treason.
|
|
|
Madam Speaker, I'm one of your constituents in San Francisco. I don't need to own a car in this great city, but I've noticed that going out-of-town is slow and cumbersome without one. Will Amtrak be improved during my lifetime? It may not be profitable, but the highway system sure isn't profitable! When will we see high-speed rail on the West Coast? Mexico's getting it. France has it. Why can't we get it, too? Thanks.
|
|
|
Speaker Pelosi,
When you championed the new FISA legislation through the house recently, you stated that "there is no inherent authority of the president to do whatever he wants. This is a democracy, not a monarchy" even though "whatever he wants" is exactly what George Bush has done for the past 7 1/2 years in violation of multiple laws and without a shred of accountability from you or anyone else, which gives him the defacto authority to do precisely "whatever he wants". Why do you expect the Bush administration to adhere to this new law when they have repeatedly ignored the existing law and any other law that they find inconvenient? In other words, if they ignored the old law without consequence, what makes you so certain that they won't simply ignore the new law as well and if they do ignore the new law, what recourse do you have to reign them in considering that this congress has failed in each and every instance with regard to the White House to enforce their own subpoenas and you yourself removed impeachment from the table? What real consequences will the Bush administration - or any other future administration - face for ignoring the new FISA law aside from a sternly worded letter?
|
|
|
A lot of people have been upset over the perceived "bending over like a blade of grass in a light breeze" the Democratic-controlled congress has been engaged in every time the Bush administration trumpets out its tried and true "Ooooh! Terrorists! Booogabooogaboooo! Terrorists!! BoooogaBooogaBooo!" line.
We're especially concerned over the so-called compromise of telecom amnesty and FISA and its fig leaves that only allow a court to decide if the Bush administration asked them to break the law. This doesn't protect our privacy or rights to due process . . . well . . . at all really, and certainly doesn't help to bring to light any of the corruption or abuse of power we suspect was going on.
Why do you keep selling us up the river?
And, as a follow up, will you please stop?
Please?
|
|
|
Posted by michel 07/07/2008 12:00 AM PDT Madame Speaker:
The principal reasons that the NetRoots have fought so hard against telecom immunity in the FISA update legistation is that (a) we want to know how egregiously the government and its private sector partners have violated our Fourth Amendment rights and (b) we want to see those responsible for crimes against the Constitution held accountable. Do you foresee this ever happening? If so how? If not, how can you claim to be defending and upholding the Constitution?
|
|
|
Posted by warvij 07/08/2008 12:00 AM PDT When you became Speaker, you announced that impeachment was "off the table." I would like to know the rationale for this statement at the time, and I would like to hear your opinion as to whether the events since then have justified your removal of this option. In short, why did you say it?
Were you afraid of the Republicans and their media machine screaming you were after payback for the Clinton debacle?
Were you afraid that impeachment would be a distraction from the business of passing bills which the president would then veto?
Were you anxious to avoid controversy?
Did you believe that the Bush administration would cooperate with subpoenas from Congressional committees?
Has your "off the table" strategy worked the way you intended it to?
|
|
|
Posted by jmhmail 07/07/2008 12:00 AM PDT It is within the power of Congress to amend the Evidence Code and the Rules of Court to prevent lawyers from citing presidential signing statements in their pleadings, and prevent federal courts from giving them evidentiary weight. (As with a "decertified" decision of the California Supreme Court, they would be free to make the same arguments - they just can't mention that those arguments were in a signing statement.) Will you be seeking to enact such legislation in the near future?
|
|
|
Posted by timfahey 07/14/2008 12:00 AM PDT Karl Rove is saying "f" off to you, the constitution, and the American People. Arrest him today and prove you have the balls as a leader.
|
|
|
Posted by rdlafond 07/08/2008 12:00 AM PDT Dear Madam Speaker:
How is it appropriate to retroactively indemnify conduct that has almost certainly infringed on the 4th Amendment privacy rights of American citizens without even attempting to investigate what has happened in an open session of Congress? Don't We, the People, deserve to know exactly how we are being surveilled before the telecom providers are given carte blanche for their activities? How much of our taxpayer dollars have been paid to the telecoms to allow the NSA to spy on us? If the Administration will invoke state secrets and executive privilege, surely the telecom officials have no right to do so and could provide us with the information if properly subpoenaed. Surely the Congress could also subpoena the rulings from the FISC that precipitated this whole mess last year?
IF ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE IS GOING TO BE WIPED AWAY BY CONGRESSIONAL FIAT, DON'T YOU AT LEAST OWE US AN ANSWER AS TO WHAT EXACTLY IS BEING DONE TO 'PROTECT US'?
|
|
|
Do you personally accept the fact that if drastic action is not taken soon to reduce carbon emissions the survival of the human race will be put at risk?
What percentage of lawmakers do you think are aware of this?
In regard to this issue, which is a bigger obstacle on capital hill: lack of education or lack of political will?
|
|
|
Posted by needtono 07/12/2008 12:00 AM PDT You should be on the podium denouncing Rove's no-show and noting that Rove and the Bush administration aren't above the law. It's not like there aren't -- to paraphrase Keith Olbermann -- 50 running administration scandals. No one lacks for material.
Why aren't you as upset as the rest of us? They don't ignore rights, ignore the waste and fraud of their crony contractors that we're paying for, selectively prosecute elected officials like state governors, out CIA agents which is supposed to be treasonous...
What more do you need????
|
|
|
Does congress plan to setup a 'blue-ribbon' (whatever) commission that would explore and put in the public domain a number of Bush administration actions that were undertaken during the past 8-odd years. Topics include, (1) Spying/FISA (2) Iraq |
|
Vote Up
Vote Down