ShareThis Page
News Columnists

Pelosi's San Francisco treat

| Monday, May 23, 2011

Remember when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi got all wound up in March 2010 about the passage of ObamaCare and told the assembled conventioneers at the National Association of Counties that the bill's reforms were going to make health care in America "very, very exciting"?

To lift "the fog of controversy" off the legislation, all Congress had to do, she explained, was "pass the bill so that you can find out what's in it."

None of us, in short, were supposed to play any part. Pelosi, Barack Obama and Harry Reid had it all figured out, just as Hillary Clinton mistakenly thought she had it all figured out 16 years earlier. The central planners were saying that we didn't need to know what was in the legislation before it was passed and, hence, there was no reason for us to bother our members of Congress with our factless opinions.

In fact, it was the same for the members of Congress. The marching order from the Obama administration was to pass the legislation posthaste without reading it, without finding out "what's in it." There was no time allocated to read the 1,017 pages of Washington doublespeak and bureaucratic legalese in the bill. Like in the children's game, we were all to play Follow the Leader. No one needed to look inside the bill in order to buy it.

That used to be called "a pig in a poke," an expression that warned against buying something when the content was concealed. The phrase is rooted in a time when buyers at farmers markets were cautioned to check inside the pokes, or sacks, lest they might get home and find that the seller had sneakily dropped a worthless cat into a sack instead of a costly suckling pig.

As it's turned out, no small number of businesses in Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco district have opened the poke and discovered that it's filled with some real rubbish. Their response, increasingly, is "No thanks."

"Pelosi's district secured almost 20 percent of the latest issuance of (ObamaCare) waivers nationwide," waivers providing a yearlong pass from ObamaCare, reported Matthew Boyle in The Daily Caller last week. "Of the 204 new ObamaCare waivers the Obama administration approved in April," Boyle reported, "38 are for fancy eateries, hip nightclubs and decadent hotels in House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's Northern California district."

Among waiver recipients is Infusion Lounge, a self-described "sophisticated night life destination," perfect for "dancing hipsters" with its "Asian inspired sub-rosa lounge fashioned by Hong Kong's hottest designer, Kinney Chan."

Boboquivari's restaurant, with its $59 porterhouses, also got a waiver, said Boyle, along with Cafe des Amis and its "timeless Parisian style," plus the fancy four-star Campton Place hotel and the four-diamond Hotel Nikko.

At Boboquivari's, add a soup appetizer, a house salad, a baked potato and a glass of Groth cabernet and the tab increases, respectively, by $9, $9, $9 and $20, taking the $59 steak to $106. Add cheesecake at $8 a slice and you're at $114. Finish up in style with a small glass of Chateau d'yquem dessert wine and your tab for one person jumps another $69 to $183, not counting tax and tip.

Still, even with all this high-end money rolling in, it appears that Boboquivari's found ObamaCare to be more unaffordable than "exciting."

The question: If these San Francisco hot spots can't afford to pay for ObamaCare, how is a truck stop in Breezewood selling trucker-sized hot-turkey sandwiches at $7.95, a big pile of mashed potatoes included, supposed to survive?

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me