Look who’s throwing IPAB under the bus
Today, the House held a second hearing on the rogue board of Medicare spending czars created by Obamacare. This mother of all death panels is known as the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). My column looks at growing Democrat opposition to the entity, which would have unprecedented authority over health care spending. Seven Dems are co-sponsors of a House IPAB repeal bill On the Senate side, GOP Sen. John Cornyn is introducing an IPAB repeal bill.
Here’s GOP Rep. Paul Ryan schooling HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on patient-centered Medicare reform. Here’s AEI fellow Dr. Scott Gottlieb’s testimony. Here’s a look at the fatal effect of IPAB on medical innovation. Here’s Philip Klein catching Sebelius’s false assertion this morning that IPAB decisions can be challenged in court. And here’s background on the Goldwater Institute’s federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of IPAB.
***
Rolling back the Obamacare Banana Republic
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2011
A rising chorus of repeal-mongers, outraged at the Obama administration’s federal health care power grab, took over Washington this week. Nope, it’s not the tea party. It’s Democrats Against the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). Yes, Democrats.
What’s IPAB? A Beltway acronym for subverting the deliberative process.
The 15-member panel of government-appointed bureaucrats was slipped into Section 3403 of the Obamacare law against the objection of more than 100 House members on both sides of the aisle. IPAB’s experts would wield unprecedented authority over Medicare spending — and in time, over an expanding jurisdiction of private health care payment rates — behind closed doors.
Freed from the normal administrative rules process — public notice, public comment, public review — that governs every other federal commission in existence.
Without the possibility of judicial review.
And liberated from congressional oversight except through an onerous accountability procedure.
Last month, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius touted IPAB as a “key part” of Obamacare. The president himself crusaded for giving the board even more regulatory “tools” to usurp congressional power over health care allocations. And he has the audacity to blame Republicans for creating a “banana republic”? Hmph.
The conservative Arizona-based Goldwater Institute has filed suit in federal court to stop IPAB. “No possible reading of the Constitution supports the idea of an unelected, standalone federal board that’s untouchable by both Congress and the courts,” says the think tank’s litigation director, Clint Bolick. But it’s the growing opposition from members of the administration’s own party that may yet doom these health care czars on steroids.
According to Politico, “New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone, of the Energy and Commerce health subcommittee, has zero interest in defending the board. ‘I’ve never supported it, and I would certainly be in favor of abolishing it.’” If that’s not clear enough, Pallone added that he’s “opposed to independent commissions or outside groups playing a role other than on a recommendatory basis.” Period.
Another House Democrat, Allyson Schwartz of Pennsylvania, is one of seven Democratic IPAB repeal co-sponsors and is scheduled to testify Wednesday at a second House hearing blasting the board. And former Democratic House Majority Leader Dick Gephardt channeled the tea party in a recent op-ed when he decried IPAB as “an unelected and unaccountable group whose sole charge is to reduce Medicare spending based on an arbitrary target growth rate.”
IPAB defenders demand an alternative, but that’s why the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission already exists. And for those unsatisfied with its woeful results, there’s the demonized GOP/Rep. Paul Ryan reform package that relies on individual choice and competition over bureaucratic diktats to reduce spiraling Medicare costs.
Opponents of GOP structural reforms have now resorted to decrying Ryan’s choice of beverages as a way to discredit the plan. An apparently besotted Rutgers University economist and former Kerry/Edwards economic adviser, Susan Feinberg, accosted Ryan at a D.C. restaurant last week while he was dining with two financial experts over a pricy bottle of wine. “I wasn’t drunk, but I was certainly emboldened to speak my mind,” Feinberg told liberal blog Talking Points Memo. She gleefully described attacking Ryan for espousing government austerity while — gasp — dining out on his own dime.
It’s the same unhinged and irrational sanctimony that has New York Times columnist David Brooks assailing entitlement reformers as moral degenerates; the Washington Post’s Richard Cohen likening them to Jonestown cult killer Jim Jones; and Daily Beast editor Tina Brown decrying them as “suicide bombers.” Ah, the days of whine and bozos.
The good news: Thanks to sober bipartisan criticism (Where are all the cheerleaders for bipartisanship when you need them?), Sebelius and company are now downplaying IPAB as a harmless “backstop mechanism” with limited powers to do anything at all to control costs. At a House hearing Tuesday, Sebelius tried to paint the board as just another run-of-the-mill dog-and-pony panel that would be “irrelevant” if Congress so chooses
It’s not quite an under-the-bus moment, but it’s certainly a nudge toward rolling back the Obamacare Republic.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Catholic lawsuit against Obamacare mandate cites 1993 legislation written by Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer
May 22, 2012 04:35 PM by Doug Powers
48 Comments
Illinois Republicans flirting with cigarette tax hike for Obamacare — and a reminder about Orrin Hatch
May 21, 2012 11:03 AM by Michelle Malkin
32 CommentsHigh school fined $15,000 for… selling soda pop during lunch
May 19, 2012 01:29 PM by Doug Powers
101 Comments
Destroying private health insurance was always the goal
May 16, 2012 09:40 AM by Michelle Malkin
43 CommentsObamacare cronyism: The First Lady’s patient-dumping, privacy-meddling scheme
May 16, 2012 08:56 AM by Michelle Malkin
102 CommentsInsurers issuing new round of rebates must credit Obamacare
May 14, 2012 11:26 AM by Doug Powers
66 CommentsWhite House to SCOTUS: ‘Extraordinary disruptions’ to Medicare if Obamacare struck down
May 4, 2012 02:03 PM by Doug Powers
86 Comments
Biden predicts Supreme Court will uphold Obamacare
April 1, 2012 12:49 PM by Doug Powers
63 Comments
Categories: Health care
Babalu Blog
» U.S. Manned Space Flight in The 21st CenturyVillainous Company
» Must Read Post of the Day. Possibly, the YearRedstate
» Kimberlin’s Associates Caught on Tape?
Beat me to it.
I forgot to mention that there is a number much more important number than $86M.
That number is 9.2%.
From what I understand, Obama has attended more fund raisers than Bush had at this time in his presidency, so a better way would be to compare in percentages.
Yeah I would say that is a much more important number come Nov 2012.
Another interesting vote is coming up in the House on the 25th of July…a vote on a balanced budget ammendment. There is no guarantee the House will be able to muster a 2/3 majority vote as it would need Dem support and from the sounds of it Reid is saying that it will be DOA in the Senate. Of course any Dem that votes against it does so at their own peril come Nov 2012 as the most recent poll (may 2011) shows that 65% of Americans favor it and only 27% oppose it. The breakdown of shows that 81% of Republicans and 45% of Democrats support it.
Then why have them in place at all?
Uh, could it be because the thugs in Washington in the WH and staffing these bureaucracies that you support have no problem ignoring many things and doing what they want anyway?
It doesn’t matter what Americans think on amnesty, Urkel will try ram it through or issue an EO to get those votes.
It doesn’t matter how many federal courts rule against his schemes, he will implement anyway.
…and you will continue slurping kool-aid and supporting him all the way.
If we gave credence to your suggestion of Urkel whipping anything other than his….
Rep. Tim Huelskamp:
“I guess we’ll have to ask the Department of the Treasury and we’re having difficulty getting answers from them, but I see under no circumstances unless it was a political decision that the administration would refuse or withhold Social Security checks because there are sufficient receipts,” Huelskamp says in the video. “Can I ask you to ask the Treasury Department — because the administration just really doesn’t want to provide information and when you stand on the evening news and make a statement that 40-some million Americans are going to not receive their checks — would you ask the administration are they planning on withholding those checks and is there a reason they wouldn’t make those payments on Aug. 3?”
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/13/video-social-security-chief-actuary-confirms-a-decision-to-withhold-checks-would-come-from-the-treasury/
When I got back from the Gulf with a torn up knee, the Army did surgery and said they found nothing, then gave me lots of Ranger candy. A year later when I went to an Air Force doc (the VA said it would be several months before they could do X-rays) he knew immediately what the problem was. Cartilage was torn and my knee cap was on the side rather than centered where it should be. A second surgery took care of that for awhile, lots more Ranger candy, then I had to have a third surgery. I stopped taking the Ranger candy since it makes you bleed easier, and a few weeks after the surgery I got the candy again. Only problem was I was now highly allergic to it and have been since, and swell up like a blowfish when I take it.
The fourth surgery took care of things for awhile, but now it’s grinding so bad you can hear it when I walk.
The VA tells me I’m too young for a knee replacement, so they give me aspirin.
So sad that every American will now get to experience this kind of “care” unless UrkleCare is repealed.
Both are way over qualified.
That’s the good news. The bad news is, the next time you go back, they’ll tell you you’re too old for one.
If I recall correctly, that is a much less mushy measure than in many elections from years past. It used to be easily over 12-15% every election.
…but then there is still plenty of time for the leftist media to muddy up the numbers.
On July 13th, 2011 at 5:35 pm, happyscrapper said:
I believe the only way
Obamaanother Democrat will get another term is by fraud, corrupton and completely stealing votes.It’s how they roll.
…and if he turns quickly, you will break your neck from having your head up his azz.
I wonder how much of that 86M was from foreign sources like his 2008 campaign.
Likely right. I will never forget the time I was lying on a gurney waiting for surgery in the basement of the VA hospital in Houston. There were several other vets on gurneys lined up along the wall. Two guys were having open heart surgery to fix issues. One told the other the VA knew of the problem with his heart, but waited until he got worse to fix it. The other agreed it was the same for him.
Nothing like taking a chance on a heart attack because some federal bureaucrat thinks you don’t need surgery yet.
Back in early 2007 I ended up with some rare type of staph infection that went after my left hip flexar muscle I recently injured. While lying on a gurney at a VA emergency room at the local clinc literally dying I was told the reason that they had not sent me to the hospital was that they were still trying to get me a bed arranged for after the surgery….
LOL..after reading that post I am picturing the scenec in the Holy Grail at swamp castle in which he is telling his efeminite son how he was told he was crazy for wanting to build a castle in the swamp. The first one fell down, the second one fell down, the third one burned down then fell over, but the fourth one stayed up.
Why do I have a feeling that if Obamacare stays that is what we will have to look forward to…swamp castle surgeries.
…and I am not at all surprised at that level of stupidity.
People may read our comments and think UrkelCare may not be that bad, or they can complain to someone if it is.
They are sorely mistaken because I believe it will be worse if fully implemented.
How many of these same Democrats voted for the legislation in the first place? If they voted for it then, why oppose it now? The time to oppose the legislation was back when it was being voted on. They failed to take a stand. If they did not know everything that was in the legislation, they should not have voted for it.
Paul Ryan: “This is how to eat the cabbage, you COW”
Did anyone notice O’Mulligan admitted (yesterday) there was no money in the Social Security ‘lock box’ so if the debt ceiling wasn’t raised, old folks and us retired vets won’t get checks on August 3?
He failed to mention we’ve already exceeded the debt ceiling and the universe hasn’t imploded… demagogue-in-chief, indeed.
I suspect none of them knew what was in it. Hell, Ninny Piglosi stated as much. Now that they are finding out what’s in it, they are suddenly concerned.
I think she was shocked that anybody even asked. Democrats generally don’t care about the content, any more than they care whether it’s constitutional.
I can see it now. An old retiree is being turned down for a life-saving procedure due to costs. During the hearing, part of the file being reviewed falls from a pile on one of the commissioners’ desks.
The pensioner looks down and asks,
“Why do you have a copy of my voting record in my medical files?”
Are we sure that the Dems are not concerned because the lawyers are feeling cut out of the process?
I know this isn’t totally in line with the thread but I’ll ask anyways.
In reading these threads, one Republican candidate or another pops up. I’m still in information gathering mode on whom I favor.
Can we have some of the weekend “open threads” devoted to discussing the pro’s and con’s of each R candidate? I’d like to read more of everyone’s take on the various contenders.
So Doug and MM? Can we make it happen combined with an article full of links to their campaign pages and voting records?
On July 14th, 2011 at 9:27 am, almiller said:
Are we sure that the Dems are not concerned because the lawyers are feeling cut out of the process?
As I understand it, lawyers will still be able to sue for malpractice. So they will now have access to that big empty federal piggy bank. Guess that will be the debt ceiling talks of that shameful period in American history.
It is no secret that the Military and Vets have been a readily available set of guinea pigs for so many things for so very long.
WELL WE SURE AS HELL CAN’T CALL THEM DEATH PANELS! IPAB sounds so much more benign and friendly.
Look at the speed with which the dems illegally pushed through the Obamacare bill. Idiot Pelosi said publicly it was “critical” that it get passed, regardless of whether any of those bozos in CONgress read it or not. She said it was an important legacy for Obeyme. There’s more here than meets the eye. These are bad people, with a bad agenda, a bad plan for providing medical care to the masses, and a bad utopian view of what they want America to become. We must vote them out in 2012.