By Julie Percha

Mar 12, 2010 3:41pm

Today’s Qs for O’s WH

As mentioned in an earlier blog post, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs came to the briefing wearing a Canadian jockey jersey, having lost a bet with his counterpart with the Canadian Prime Minister’s office that would have required him to wear the jersey for fifteen minutes of his on-camera briefing.

TAPPER: Has it been 15 minutes yet?  Do you want — do you want to put your jacket on?
  
GIBBS:  Do you feel uncomfortable, Jake? (Laughs)

TAPPER: I feel like if I show this to the viewers of ABC News,  World News, we'd have to explain the whole thing.  They're going to be a little confused why on a story about health care you're wearing a hockey jersey.   I'm saying –   
 
GIBBS:  I — it can't be any stranger than some of the other  stuff I see on the news, so — (laughter) — so I'm not entirely sure  that — I'm not entirely sure what — somebody give Jake the Canadian  one and we'll just do a quick two-shot and we'll –

TAPPER: A face-off.

GIBBS:  — yeah. Would you feel more comfortable if I switched?
   
TAPPER: I'm just glad it was a hockey, not a wrestling bet.    
  
GIBBS:  (Laughs.)  Yeah, well — (laughter).  
  
 (Cross talk.)
 
TAPPER: So –  
   
GIBBS:  I was going to say something, but I –
 
REPORTER: It's a family program.  
 
GIBBS:  Yeah.
  
TAPPER: Other than talking to members of Congress, what is so important that the president needs to be here for those extra two days?  I understand that the members of Congress were asking President Obama to do this, that you're — that you're not imposing his presence.  But what can he — what difference will it make?   
   
GIBBS:  Well, look, I — Jake, I think the president will use  the time, as I said earlier, to speak either individually with or in small groups with members that may be at this point undecided on how they'll vote.  The president, I think, will take the opportunity to  once again reiterate his case for why this reform is so important, why  it's important to do this now, why it's important not to stop or to  start over, why we're dealing with dramatic spikes in health insurance  right now and why we have to deal with this problem.  
   
TAPPER: Why do you think so many members — I mean, 216 members of the House who voted for it in November, voted for the House bill, are still there, and that's a majority.  Why do you think so many of them are having second thoughts?

GIBBS:  Well, Jake, I think some of them are likely waiting for finished CBO scoring.  I think — I think that's a natural thing to wait for, and I think they'll have time to evaluate that scoring and to evaluate the legislation in full.  But again, I think the president believes that he can make a very strong case for why this is important to do right now.

TAPPER: And lastly, as you know, a lot of House Democrats are distrustful of the Senate, of Senate Democrats.  And they're worried  that, with the way the parliamentarian has ruled, they are going to be  tricked somehow into passing the Senate bill and then the fixes to the  Senate bill, and the Senate won't pass the fixes, and they will have been tricked into passing the Senate bill that a lot of them don't like without those fixes.  Is President Obama reassuring them, telling these House Democrats that if the reconciliation — if the fix doesn't  pass, the Senate bill in itself, he won't sign that bill or –  

GIBBS:  Well, look, again — and I mentioned some of this yesterday — I think some of this — I don't want to wade into the  parliamentary politics on Capitol Hill, except to say this.  I — the president is talking with — not just with members of the House on the  vote that they're going to have to make, but also with members of the  Senate to — look, I — to ensure that the corrections that the   president sees as so important — not just the House, but the  president sees as so important — are also acted on.  And so I don't  — this is — it's a dual track.  It works together.  But the  president is working on both of those issues.  
 
TAPPER: But will — is it possible, in any way you look at it, that one would happen that the Senate bill would pass but the fixes would not, and the Senate bill would become law?  Because that's what House members are worried about.   
   
GIBBS:  I — they are concerned.  I think that's why the  president is spending time also dealing with senators, to ensure that  they are supportive of those legislative fixes on their side of it, too.  
 
-jpt    

 

User Comments

Dem Abortion Feud Deepens
Rep. Stupak says party leader told him, ‘We want to pay for abortions,’ as Dems try to get health bill over finish line… no change here
Obama VS America

Posted by: another crisis-another photo op | March 12, 2010, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm

LANDRIEU $300 MILLION ‘LOUISIANA PURCHASE’ GIVEAWAY REMAINS IN BILL…
no change there
Obama VS America

Posted by: another crisis-another photo op | March 12, 2010, 3:51 pm 3:51 pm

Larry O’Donnell has emphatically proclaimed that the way Dems intend to use reconciliation is “unprecedented” and has “never, never, never” been so used before
Does he still work for MSNBC? LMAO
Obama Vs America

Posted by: another crisis-another photo op | March 12, 2010, 3:57 pm 3:57 pm

Thank God it wasn’t a Speedo brief bet.

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | March 12, 2010, 4:26 pm 4:26 pm

Dodd had a good point.. the 101st Senator is the clock.. that is ticking toward Nov. 2010.

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | March 12, 2010, 4:39 pm 4:39 pm

Jake, he’s staying so he can bribe and threaten those who are on the fence. In other words, he’s gonna push them off onto his side whether they like it or not. I wonder is these little talks will be behind closed doors? you betcha

Posted by: whatsgoingonhere? | March 12, 2010, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm

Lots and lots of outraged democratic voters over today’s antics and shenanigans.

Posted by: jan | March 12, 2010, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm

These people make pond scum look appealing.

Posted by: wis134 | March 12, 2010, 5:19 pm 5:19 pm

Lesson learned? No matter what everything will come up Pittsburgh.

Posted by: Luke | March 12, 2010, 5:21 pm 5:21 pm

And the threats and “chicago polictics” go on….
Bart Stupak -
Now, in the debate’s final hours, Stupak says the other eleven are coming under “enormous” political pressure from both the White House and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.). “I am a definite ‘no’ vote,” he says. “I didn’t cave. The others are having both of their arms twisted, and we’re all getting pounded by our traditional Democratic supporters, like unions.”
The arguments they have made to him in recent deliberations, he adds, “are a pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party.”
And the politics of the issue are pretty rough. “This has really reached an unhealthy stage,” Stupak says. “People are threatening ethics complaints on me. On the left, they’re really stepping it up. Every day, from Rachel Maddow to the Daily Kos, it keeps coming. Does it bother me? Sure. Does it change my position? No.”

Posted by: susie | March 12, 2010, 5:24 pm 5:24 pm

Do unto Republicans as Republicans would do unto you. Pass the bill.

Posted by: tierra | March 12, 2010, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm

LANDRIEU $300 MILLION ‘LOUISIANA PURCHASE’ GIVEAWAY REMAINS IN BILL…
____________________________________
And so it should – if you had done any research at all you would know this funding arises directly out of the situation surrounding Hurrican Katrina and the impact of that on New Orleans and Louisiana.
The Republican right toadies don’t care to research facts or the truth – instead act as if it’s somehow corrupt – again a sleazy attempt to score political points.
The Republican right has no ethics.

Posted by: tierra | March 12, 2010, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm

Katrina happened five years ago. Since then billions of dollars have gone into reconstruction in Louisiana-the Katrina bull is nothing but political cover for Mary Landrieu and to a lesser extent Jindal.Anybody with a shred of knowledge about politics in Baton Rouge and the Big Easy would know that the lion’s share of any funding spent would have nothing to do with Katrina.But of course politics are a bit softer on the Bay of Fundy.

Posted by: Nephron | March 12, 2010, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm

Now, in the debate’s final hours, Stupak says the other eleven are coming under “enormous” political pressure from both the White House and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.)
Posted by: susie
well susie, take a short look back to those halcyon daze of Tom DeLay (R), (felon)… he wasn’t nicknamed the ‘hammer’ for nothing..
btw:
even ABC ran a network news analysis of Stupak’s claims and they showed him to be wrong…..
btw2:
there is a very extreme conflict of interest between the religious affiliations of some congressional and senate members with their obligations to the citizens.

Posted by: PO'd | March 12, 2010, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm

They can’t trust each other? The House and Senate of the United States of America can’t trust each other? Good grief, what the hell have we become! After all the liberal chatter about this bill not being ‘about politics’ but about the uninsured American people, I wonder if they can explain this?

Posted by: Shoe | March 12, 2010, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm

Why can’t Gibbs give an honest answer about the bribe Sestak received from the WH to not run against Specter?
No surprise that the MSM is quiet about a possible crime committed by the Obama Administration.

Posted by: ollie | March 12, 2010, 6:42 pm 6:42 pm

The Republican right is always on about the need to fight government power – until they get elected into office and then it’s everyone’s patriotic duty to defend government power.

Posted by: tierra | March 12, 2010, 7:35 pm 7:35 pm

50,000 comedians out of work and this guy is clowning around?

Posted by: Quo Warranto | March 12, 2010, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm

ABC- Jake Tapper
Have you seen the latest interview with Stupak from National Review- by Robert Costa-
Do you think you could get the Democratic Leaderships reaction to this section of the interview-it’s particularly troubling:
What are Democratic leaders saying? “If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.”

Posted by: rory | March 12, 2010, 8:12 pm 8:12 pm

Shoe: you should be ashamed for being so reckless as to indicate to readers of this blog that Tom DeLay is a (felon) Tom DeLay has never been convicted of an ethics charge by the bi-partisan Ethics Committee of the House neither was he convicted of anything in court. Just because Tom DeLay was an effective leader in the House and politically crap was constantly thrown at him does not make him a (felon) and if you want to be taken seriously here on this blog or anywhere else get your FACTS straight — because you are dead wrong. I hope the rest of the contributors who care about this see this and see what is truth and what is politically motivataed.

Posted by: loggr1050 | March 12, 2010, 11:10 pm 11:10 pm

i can not say any thing about this issue.
This political is a very bad game . no one can judge what will happen

Posted by: Ilan Ben Menachem | March 13, 2010, 10:21 am 10:21 am

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.