Independent Payment Advisory Board (Obamacare's most anti-constitutional act ever)

CATO Institute ^ | June 14, 2012 | Diane Cohen and Michael F. Cannon

[listenhillary]

When a member of Congress introduces legislation, the Constitution requires that legislative proposal to secure the approval of the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the president (unless Congress overrides a presidential veto) before it can become law. In all cases, either chamber of Congress may block it.

In 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) created the Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB. When the unelected government officials on this board submit a legislative proposal to Congress, it automatically becomes law: PPACA requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to implement it. Blocking an IPAB "proposal" requires at a minimum that the House and the Senate and the president agree on a substitute. The Board's edicts therefore can become law without congressional action, congressional approval, meaningful congressional oversight, or being subject to a presidential veto. Citizens will have no power to challenge IPAB's edicts in court.

Worse, PPACA forbids Congress from repealing IPAB outside of a seven-month window in the year 2017, and even then requires a three-fifths majority in both chambers. A heretofore unreported feature of PPACA dictates that if Congress misses that repeal window, PPACA prohibits Congress from ever altering an IPAB "proposal." By restricting lawmaking powers of future Congresses, PPACA thus attempts to amend the Constitution by statute.

More by Michael F. Cannon

IPAB's unelected members will have effectively unfettered power to impose taxes and ration care for all Americans, whether the government pays their medical bills or not. In some circumstances, just one political party or even one individual would have full command of IPAB's lawmaking powers. IPAB truly is independent, but in the worst sense of the word. It wields power independent of Congress, independent of the president, independent of the judiciary, and independent of the will of the people.

The creation of IPAB is an admission that the federal government's efforts to plan America's health care sector have failed. It is proof of the axiom that government control of the economy threatens democracy.

IPAB may be the most anti-constitutional measure ever to pass Congress, and it is therefore tempting to dismiss IPAB as an absurdity that the body politic will soon reject. Until that occurs, IPAB will potentially empower just one unelected government official to impose any tax or regulation, to appropriate funds, and to wield other lawmaking powers.

[listenhillary]

This must be ripped out at the roots and copious amounts of pesticide applied to prevent it's regrowth.

[ronnie raygun]

Anyone screaming and demanding? I thought so

[Scotswife]

talk about getting between a woman and her doctor!

[mo]

This is SUCH a great gift to Congress...they just figured out how to pass anything without a vote....that it goes nowhere until We the People yank it up by the roots. That will require a hyper-Tea Party Congress.

[Jim Noble]

By restricting lawmaking powers of future Congresses, PPACA thus attempts to amend the Constitution by statute

An obvious impossibility.

Suppose Obamacare goes into effect (that can't happen, because that's not its purpose). Further, suppose it works as planned.

Then, in 2036, a Congress passes a law, which is signed by the President, dissolving IPAB.

It is inconceivable that IPAB could continue. There would be no basis to overrule such a law.

[STYRO]

If one entity or person is allowed to impose irrevocable laws, what keeps them from declaring themselves dictator for life?

[Diogenesis]

[rollo tomasi]

What is the point of screaming and demanding? If I remember correctly, several people on this forum are still enamored with Roberts logic and poker playing skills ensuring a Republican route in November because he allowed this monstrosity to stand, yeah that’s the ticket lol.

[GiovannaNicoletta]

bookmark

[listenhillary]

"it is therefore tempting to dismiss IPAB as an absurdity that the body politic will soon reject. Until that occurs, IPAB will potentially empower just one unelected government official to impose any tax or regulation, to appropriate funds, and to wield other lawmaking powers."

We will see when it is rejected and removed. Until that time it is "the law of the land".

[listenhillary]

I had heard nothing about this lawsuit.

“Diane Cohen is senior attorney at the Goldwater Institute and lead counsel in Coons v. Geithner, a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of IPAB.”

[Venturer]

I doubt any of our legislators even realize this part of Obamacare is even there.
They never read the bill. They still haven’t read it.

They don’t care. they are only up there on the hill sucking up the goodies.

Did they reject the recess appointments, The Don’t ask Don’t tell removal, the Amnesty law Obama passed himself?What have they done about Obama’s attack on religion?
What have they done about a lack of a budget for the last 3 years?

The Congress is under the influence of a man they fear because if they say or do anything Obama doesn’t like they are accused of racism, and that frightens them to petrification.

[Girlene]

When the unelected government officials on this board submit a legislative proposal to Congress, it automatically becomes law: PPACA requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to implement it. Blocking an IPAB "proposal" requires at a minimum that the House and the Senate and the president agree on a substitute. The Board's edicts therefore can become law without congressional action, congressional approval, meaningful congressional oversight, or being subject to a presidential veto. Citizens will have no power to challenge IPAB's edicts in court.

So if the IPAB decides that redheads should not be treated for breast cancer because some "govt" study shows that cancer treatments are not effective on that group, they can be eliminated from coverage? (insert any other stupid idea there)....and unless the House, Senate, and President all catch on to this ridiculous edict and all agree on some "substitute", it will become law? And, let's say those folks are asleep at the wheel, and I happen to be a redhead who develops breat cancer, I can't challenge their reccomendations in court? IOW, I'm toast?

This is beyond frightening. The "brilliant" chief justice Roberts thought this was constitutional?

[listenhillary]

IPAB is a mini government within the federal bureaucracy. Not only does it create rather than merely implement Medicare cost-cutting policy, but it has greater power within its realm than elected officials — including the president of the United States. Indeed, its “advice” is really a mandate that literally can become law over a presidential veto.

Not only that, but IPAB began this year(2012), with $15 million to be spent getting the board’s infrastructure up and running. Soon, the president will be nominating its 15 “expert” members of the board of directors, each of whom is subject to Senate confirmation.

Expect these nominations to be among President Obama’s first actions should he be re-elected. Indeed, he will have little time to waste. According to the terms of the Affordable Care Act, IPAB must submit its first draft recommendations to the health and human services secretary by September 1, 2013. Its first Medicare cost-cutting goals must become law by August 15, 2014.

Why did I write “must” become law” instead of “may”? IPAB’s unique “fast track” authority divests Congress of discretion regarding the amount of money to be cut from Medicare once IPAB has submitted its “advice.” Get a load of these legislative handcuffs:

By January 15, 2014, IPAB must submit a proposal to Congress and the president for reaching Medicare savings targets in the coming year.

The majority leaders in the House and Senate must introduce bills incorporating the board’s proposal the day they receive it.

Congress cannot “consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report;that would repeal or otherwise change the recommendations of the board” if such changes fail to meet the board’s budgetary target.

By April 1, all legislative committees must complete their evaluation. Any committee that fails to meet the deadline is barred from further consideration of the bill.

If Congress does not pass the proposal or a substitute plan meeting the IPAB’s financial target before August 15, or if the president vetoes the proposal passed by Congress, the original Independent Payment Advisory Board recommendations automatically take effect.

From IPAB: the part of Obamacare that can’t be repealed Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/06/ipab-the-part-of-obamacare-that-cant-be-repealed/#ixzz25DcKPSYm

[listenhillary]

“As the law now stands, IPAB can’t be dissolved before 2017, and then only by a three-fifths vote of both Houses of Congress. Oh, and the legislative stake through the heart can only be introduced between January 3 and February 1 of that year, and must be passed by August 15. Did I say handcuffs earlier? I meant straight jacket.

Whether the terms of an existing law can bind subsequent Congresses remains an open constitutional question. But getting the matter finally decided by the courts would take years. Besides, we can no longer trust judges and justices to do the right constitutional thing even when they know what it is.”

http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/06/ipab-the-part-of-obamacare-that-cant-be-repealed/2/

[Voter62vb]

Hold on here. It's more important that our national attention be directed to “what is that crazy ‘Mormonism’?...”/s

Nancy and her Giant Gavel-brator and The Slock-puppet-in-Chief are worse than criminals.

Ha! Change indeed!

[paint_your_wagon]

.....because some “govt” study shows that cancer treatments are not effective on that group....

In the Soviet Union, Stalin set up a guy named Lysenko to direct their agriculture programs. He conducted ‘research’ on techniques to grow crops. It didn’t matter that his so called research could not be verified by other scientist or agricultural workers. His conclusions were considered to be the law of the land. They had very poor crop production under Lysenko, and people that tried to oppose him were persecuted in various ways

I believe all this crap about using research to determine the ‘best’ ways to conduct medicine is really a way to place the absolute power into the hands of a few gov’t officials. Once they make the statement that “research shows...”, or “our study suggests....”, then nobody will be able to challenge (legally) their dictates. This is also the direction that public education is headed.

[outofsalt]

PPACA Is that pronounced, “Macaca”?

[Girlene]

Yep.....and, as taxpayers, we will pay for those studies that will be used to define the health care coverage. This law is truly evil.

[Semperfiwife]

IPAB was the brainchild of one Dr. (and I use that term very loosely) Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of the foul mouthed mayor of Chicago. His basis is that there is a finite amount of health care dollars and they need to be allocated to the care of those Productive Citizens who basically can vote for the Democrat party. When crafting this monstrosity, they were under the delusion that the Democrat party would keep winning for the next fifty years according to James Carville. 2010 put a dent in his theory, which was based on, I believe, their having complete and total control of the Education/Indoctrination sector thereby guaranteeing that their time had come to foist upon the masses all of their Communist/Marxist ideas.