ObamaCare's Rules Exempt From President's Regulatory Review
Last year, President Obama ordered the various agencies in his administration to conduct a regulatory review designed to weed out overly burdensome rules. But Obama's Department of Health and Human Services is now confirming that the thousands of pages of rules and regulations created by last year's health care overhaul will be exempt from review. From The Hill:
The Health and Human Services Department won't be revisiting regulations that implement the new healthcare law during its review of potentially burdensome regulations.
Sherry Glied, assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at HHS, said the rules are too new for a second look. She testified Monday at a hearing on President Obama's executive order directing agencies to identify and revise regulations that can be streamlined or eliminated.
Glied said HHS is conducting that review but won't include regulations that implement the healthcare law. Federal departments assess the costs and benefits of their regulations before issuing them. Because healthcare reform rules were issued so recently, she said, HHS is confident in its analysis of their impacts and doesn't need to review those rules again.
"Nothing has changed to make us look at them" again, Glied said.
Nothing, eh? Not the widespread rejection of the proposed rules governing ObamaCare's accountable care organizations? Not the consternation over the law's medical loss ratio requirements, which the administration has already waived for Maine after noting that the rule "has a reasonable likelihood of destabilizing the Maine individual health insurance market?" Not the 1,000-plus individual waivers the administration has granted allowing businesses and unions to get out of a number of the law's specific requirements? No, I guess there's no reason at all to think that any of the health care law's rules might be in need of review.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Glied's got Jungle Fever, LOL. 😉
Ayn Rand on Money: Francisco's Speech.
http://libertarians4freedom.bl.....peech.html
GREEGGGOOOOOOOOOOOO
And just like that, he's GONE!
Maybe HERCULE L. SAIVINEN will take up GREGGGGGGGGGGGGOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO's case.
Whoa, what the hell? Did they ban Grego? For what reason?
Teh stoopid? Racist? No, we get all that and more just from the regulars.
Hmmm....he's an Iranian agent? He's a troll from HuffPo? No, we have Tony...
For those who missed my comments thanks to the "libertarian" moderator or whoever loves making me as a spammer. I said something about that white woman having "Jungle Fever."
Racist? I think it was a black guy who made a movie called Jungle Fever. So there.
GREGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
Also, *clears throat*:
RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
Gawd that's a stomach-turning picture. Thanks, guys.
I too shudder every time I see it.
And it can't be unseen.
Props on the alt-text, Suderman.
You've never seen two men kissing before?
I'd like to see the use of waivers brought into a legal challenge but I surmise that will only happen when the mandates are in full effect
In a column about the revolving door between big government and the lobbying world, here's what the irreplaceable Tim Carney wrote about the waiver process for folks trying to escape the burden of government-run healthcare.
This seemed so familiar that I wondered whether Tim was guilty of plagiarism. But he's one of the best journalists in DC, so I knew that couldn't be the case.
Then I realized that there was plagiarism, but the politicians in Washington were the guilty parties. As can be seen in this passage from Atlas Shrugged, the Obama Administration is copying from what Ayn Rand wrote ? as dystopian parody ? in the 1950s.
This isn't the first time the Obama Administration has inadvertently brought Atlas Shrugged to life.
That's great, Dilbert! Sad, yet useful. I humbly request more such Obama-Atlas if you have it handy.
... that's a lot of words to say: "Waaaaaahhhhhhh! Why don't the people we hate change the rules so that they can do exactly what we want them to?"
Sherry Glied, assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at HHS, said the rules are too new for a second look.
How about taking a first look? Crikey, don't pretend it's already been done.
Alt Text Ultra Win
Simply stated, we will not stand idly by as PPACA regulations are threatened with review.
Because healthcare reform rules were issued so recently, [Sherry Glied] said, HHS is confident in its analysis of their impacts and doesn't need to review those rules again.
So confident that Ms Glied would place her career on the line?
Let me be clear: You can't win the future when you're held accountable for stuff.
her name is pronounced Ms Gee Lied?