Sunday, June 17, 2012

Obamacare's IPAB is not just unconstitutional but is anti-constitution -Cato

An important Cato policy paper can be found here .Among many other important comments in the paper is the charge that Obamacare is not just unconstitutional;it is" anti-constitutional".

I have written about IPAB on several occasions. See here for some of my comments about IPAB and the concept of an "entrenchment provision" which a legal scholar discusses here offering tepid assurance that such a thing could not really happen. Entrenchment means that a legislature passes a law and includes within that statute a provision that prohibit future legislature from repealing or altering the law. There is such wording in ACA.

According to the Cato paper referenced above, the Obama administration has said that of course, IPAB could be abolished by congressional action even though Cato's paper said that statement conflicts with the clear wording of ACA. The legal analysis quoted above does say that apparently the Supreme Court has said they will not allow entrenchment.Whether IPAB is really entrenched on not,one has to assume that the authors of that section wanted IPAB to be an immutable,eternal entity.

So maybe (hopefully) that aspect of IPAB is just a tempest in a teapot but there is much more to be very,very worried about with IPAB . The Cato paper written by Diane Cohen and Michael Cannon discusses those issues in detail.If their analysis is correct the power that this appointed body will have is more than mind numbingly frightening.

Here is a good summary on Cato's web site giving a brief summary of the paper referenced above.

1 comment:

Andrew_M_Garland said...

The short answer is NO, any US Congress can repeal and amend the laws passed by prior congresses, and we can amend the constitution as necessary, and even break treaties.

Entrenchment Provisions in the Health Care Bill

The entrenchment provision concerning the IPAB shows the totalitarian mindset of the Democrats and Obama. The provision has no weight, but they couldn't help themselves. They just had to include prayers for complete control.

Motto: "We have power now. Can't we put something in writing which will give us power forever? What can it hurt."

They could just as well have passed a bill that repealed the Constitution and established the Democratic party as the permanent ruling party of the US. That would have expressed the same mindset, but in a way which would have been obviously laughable.

The IPAB provision is just as laughable, but it takes a few minutes to get the joke.