In the many years I worked in Congress, I don't remember the POTUS having the power to "promise" that Congress and reconciliations meetings would be open to the press. I'm not saying that they should or shouldn't be (though the sausage making rule applies to public interest in the actual functioning of a reconciliation meeting). However, while Obama may have said that the process should be open, he certainly has NO power -- NO PRESIDENT HAS EVER HAD THAT POWER -- over Congress to force that or make that...his opinion, in other words, is meaningless. He knew it. The reporters who heard it knew it. The commentators commenting on it knew it. What every you are mad about here, it is a nonsense point.
My recollection is that Conference Committee activities are completely under the control of the House and Senate, operate by House and Senate rules and the rule for the bill voted on the floor of each body. While the WH is involved from the stand point of trying to shape a final version of a bill that the President wants, or to try and avoid "veto bait" (not an issue here), the WH doesn't "control" the process or its atmospherics.
In short, complaining that Obama "renigged" on something he as president would never have any control over -- other by the moral power of saying government and congressional functions should be more transparent -- is really silly. If you want to compalin about lack of transparance, point to Pelosi and Reid...oh, and than go back and look at how the GOP managed conference committee meetings back when they controlled Congress...often not telling Democrat members of those committees where they were meeting. Again, not defending obvious hypocracy...but hypocracy is well distributed among all the parties to American politics -- in fact, they're addicted to it.
