LancasterOnline.com:News:Pitts issues statement

Pitts issues statement

Nov 08, 2009 00:10 EST

By PAULA WOLF, Staff Writer

Related Stories

Immediately after the Democrats' health care bill was passed, Rep. Joseph Pitts — who opposed the legislation — released the following statement:

"Instead of passing health care reform with a united front of Democrats and Republicans, Speaker Nancy Pelosi chose to reject bipartisanship and twist arms to pass this bill with a slim majority.

"The American people can have no confidence in this bill that seeks to take over 17 percent of the American economy."

In contrast, Pitts said in a follow-up phone interview, the abortion amendment adopted before the final vote was a true bipartisan measure, garnering 64 Democratic votes to go long with near-unanimous GOP support.

He also called the legislation a "massive, massive spending bill" that will ultimately result in a government-run health care system.

In his statement, Pitts said the bill could cost 5.5 million jobs and will burden employers and individuals with mandates and taxes.

And the legislation "does nothing to control [health care] costs," he said in the phone interview.

Paula Wolf is a staff writer for the Sunday News. She can be reached by e-mail at pwolf@lnpnews.com.

Recent Posts

Showing 5 most recent comments out of 21 total TalkBack comments about this article
View full comments | Comment on this article

QUOTE (ceejay @ Nov 11 2009, 10:18 AM)

Guess the majority of his constituents want him there, and made their wishes known.

Arrgh
[attachment=6195:rep__edv...t_prints.jpg]

skeptic2

QUOTE (FabulouslyBroke @ Nov 11 2009, 10:15 AM)

I found it interesting that Pitts is part of the "C Street Family" group.

quote from an article on Salon.com ...

But if Stupak, a former state trooper from Michigan, provided the muscle, his partner, Joe Pitts -- a Pennsylvania Republican with decades in the trenches of the antiabortion battle -- may have brought the brains, and more, a new Christian right coalition custom tailored for the Democratic Party's growing religious conservatism. Stupak is Roman Catholic; Pitts is evangelical. Both are members of the predominantly evangelical organization called the Family; Stupak lives in its C Street house. Together, they're poster boys for the evangelical/conservative Catholic alliance known as "co-belligerency," a culture war strategy designed to take territory within the Democratic Party as well the GOP.

You guys totally crack me up. Okay. Let me get this straight. You object to Christians forming a mutual interest group, but you have no problem whatsoever with the Congressional Progressive Caucus, or the Black Caucus, or the TWO Hispanic caucuses. How about the Asian Pacific American Caucus? Women's Caucus?

Wait. There's more. How about the LGBT Equality Caucus? http://www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelate...m?blog_id=18744

Add to that all the private clubs, the swanky private by-invitation-only groups in D.C. populated by our elected officials and all their lobbyist buddies. You know. The ones Obama was going to NOT have in his administration?

But <cue the scary music> OOooooooooo, be afraid! Be very afraid of those <shiver!> <gasp> CHRISTIAN!!!

ceejay

QUOTE (ceejay @ Nov 11 2009, 10:18 AM)

Guess the majority of his constituents want him there, and made their wishes known.

This is actually a crappy defense of Mr. Pitts. You know as well as I do that people like Vince Fumo and John Barley were re-elected despite decades of corruption. I'm not saying Pitts is corrupt, just that the voters can get it wrong.

Periodically, I post on here a challenge to his supporters to outline his accomplishments. The replies are sad, really. Some are just razzing me, I know. He is a fiscal conservative who said very little against deficit spending during the GWBush years, with the exception of his articulated opposition of last year's bail out. He is pro-life.

What has he done in 13 years? I'll tell you what- try to find a Democrat who has been there since 1996 and has done less than Pitts has.

skeptic2

It concerns me that Pitts protects the "unborn" at all costs and yet how many millions of "born" American have died in the past 15 years because they did not have health insurance and died as a result of no insurance? The fact that this hypocracy is lost on them is silenced by battle cries that do nothing to protect the living.

But hey... it's these things that keep getting him elected and covered by government health insurance. I'm sure if someone were to approach him about their child or relative not able to continue chemotherapy treatments because of no insurance, he would pat them on the head and tell them it's "God's will."

I for one am hoping that the health insurance bill also has a ban on invitro fertilization, sperm donation, and egg donation and freezing the "unborn" as Pitts likes to protect. I'm sick of the multiple pregnancies being "protected" because it's "God's will." Pshaw!

harv1

QUOTE (ceejay @ Nov 11 2009, 12:30 PM)

OOooooooooo, be afraid! Be very afraid of those <shiver!> <gasp> CHRISTIAN!!!

..."You can go on line and find video of him talking about the objectives of the group is to create a god led government." - Jeff Sharlett author of The Family

i bet the taliban and al qaeda would totally agree with pitts..

mnepats52

View full comments | Comment on this article