The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Right Prescription

Donald Berwick’s Replacement

By on 12.2.11 @ 6:09AM

Marilyn Tavenner is a woman with a past.

Oscar Wilde famously wrote, “I like men who have a future and women who have a past.” We can thus assume that, were he with us today, he would turn up his nose at Donald Berwick and offer Marilyn Tavenner his most charming smile. This is Berwick’s last day as Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and Tavenner is his replacement. If it’s not obvious why Wilde would beam on the latter, it soon will be. First, however, it’s necessary to recall a sentence from Obama’s first address before a joint session of Congress. During that speech he talked a lot about fraud. He was particularly effusive about his intent to end the widespread bilking of government health care programs: “We will root out the waste, fraud, and abuse in our Medicare program that doesn’t make our seniors any healthier.”

Still confused? Well, Marilyn Tavenner is a former executive of Hospital Corporation of America (HCA), which was responsible for the largest single example of Medicare fraud in history. As the Boston Globe reports, “While Tavenner worked for HCA, the company was busily enhancing its profit margin by defrauding the Medicare, Medicaid and TRICARE systems.” HCA ended up paying nearly $1.5 billion in fines before the smoke cleared. CMS falls under the aegis of HHS and, as its administrator, Tavenner would work with the Office of Inspector General in fraud cases. Thus, as the Globe points out, “It hardly seems wise to put her in charge of the government system her company helped defraud.” And yet Tavenner is the President’s nominee to replace Donald Berwick.

There is no indication that Tavenner was directly involved in HCA’s billing skullduggery. However, after the Berwick controversy, it’s surprising that even the famously tone deaf Obama would nominate someone with such problematic ties to the industry she will regulate. These ties have also been ignored by most major media outlets, whose coverage of Tavenner has consisted primarily of puff pieces focusing on her early years as a nurse. This contrasts sharply with the coverage received by Republican Rick Scott, who was the CEO of HCA during the investigations. Scott was never implicated in the fraud scheme either. But it did happen on his watch, and every “news” story written about him while he was running for Governor of Florida insinuated that he was somehow involved in the fraud.

Obama’s tone deafness and disparate treatment of Scott and Tavenner by the media are less important, of course, than the latter’s likely policies as the head of CMS. Unfortunately, there is little comfort to be gleaned from the record. For example, as Deputy Principal Administrator of CMS, Tavenner had responsibility for the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight (CCIIO) and its director, Steve Larsen. If this bureaucracy and its director sound familiar it is because they were the fount from which the infamous Obamacare waivers spewed forth. And the CCIIO continues to ignore congressional requests to provide the criteria by which its decisions to grant the waivers were made. In other words, that supreme symbol of corruption and bureaucratic arrogance answered to Obama’s new nominee to head CMS.

If the high-handed behavior of the CCIIO is a harbinger of things to come, the only real difference between Marilyn Tavenner and Donald Berwick is that she didn’t run her mouth as much as he did before leaving the private sector and going to work in government. After leaving HCA, she joined the administration of Virginia’s Democrat Governor Tim Kaine as the Old Dominion’s Secretary of Health and Human Resources. She left that position when Republican Bob McDonnell replaced Kaine and joined CMS as Berwick’s deputy in February of this year. Despite her obviously important role at CMS and her direct connection to the controversial CCIIO, she has managed to keep a low profile. This, and her ability to survive the HCA scandal unscathed, suggests that she is more politically savvy than Berwick.

There is no sign, however, that she holds different views than her controversial predecessor. She spoke to the National Association of Medicaid Directors last month and echoed refrains often heard from Berwick. Her position on giving the states control of their own Medicaid programs, which are funded by state as well as federal funds, is virtually identical to that of the good doctor: “That approach would simply dump the problem on states and force them to dump patients, benefits or make provider cuts or all the above.” In reality it won’t necessarily force them to do any of these things. It would, however, allow the states to develop creative ways of covering the poor, reduce administrative costs, and reduce the coercive power of Washington over the states. One suspects that the last is Tavenner’s primary concern.

Nonetheless, she has earned the tentative approval of at least one Republican. Yesterday, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said, “Obviously, I’m not in the Senate, so I don’t have that vote, but I do think she is qualified.” Other interested parties have been less supportive. Her history produced the following remark from Dr. Jane M. Orient, Executive Director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. “Tavenner has served the largest for-profit operator of medical facilities in the world, and the gubernatorial administration of a strong Obama supporter and rising star in Democrat Party politics, neither of which has a sterling record of integrity.” In other words, Tavenner is a woman with a past, and Dr. Orient is less fond of such people than was Oscar Wilde. The Senate would be wise to heed the former.

About the Author

David Catron is a health care revenue cycle expert who has spent more than twenty years working for and consulting with hospitals and medical practices. He has an MBA from the University of Georgia and blogs at Health Care BS.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (66) |

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.2.11 @ 7:28AM

Well, David,
what kind of person did you expect the Corruptocrat in Charge to appoint?

Maddox| 12.2.11 @ 10:16AM

Someone who knows how to help Obama get even with working America and redistribute their earnings to those who are apart of his and Holder's "Just US Department." It is obvious, isn't it? The media should be all over this but they won't.
His campaign slogan for next year should be "If we can't have it, nobody will!"

Occam's Tool| 12.2.11 @ 6:42PM

AAPS is very sound on matters regarding Medicare and government corruption in Medicine. Both Ron Paul and I agree on that one. Those who know my opinion on Paul should realize that that is all I really need to say on the issue---it is a "broken clock" situation.

jothepro| 12.2.11 @ 7:41AM

Impeach Barry..

Timothy L. Pennell| 12.2.11 @ 8:00AM

If you wanted to Destroy this Country (Dreams From My Father) what would you do? Would you Bankrupt it? Would you pile on more DEBT, than it could ever hope to pay back? Would you treat our Enemies better than you treat our Friends? Would you seek to DESTROY JOBS, in the hopes of making more and more people, dependent on YOU, for their daily bread? Would you continue to fill Positions by the person's IDEOLOGY, with no regard to the Content of their Character? Would you put people in Positions who will Blindly OBEY your Directives, regardless of their LEGALITY, and the Constitution?

Of course you would.

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 10:30AM

I don't know, why don't you ask your Republicant friends - who piled on more debt than anyone in history - 10.7 Trillion. Not to mention the unfunded liabilities as far as the eye can see.
Why don't you ask Brownie how he got his job? Cronyism and Ideologues were rampant in Bush's terms. Hmmm, blindly obey, u mean like Atty Gen Gonzalez? or Ashcroft?
Hmmm, treat enemies, u mean like the Saudis that were the majority of the 9/11 attackers?
Are you sure you're a Republicant? You sure seem to be attacking them ....

Timothy L. Pennell| 12.2.11 @ 11:06AM

Excuse me. It took almost 250 Years to get the Debt to $9 Trillion, which the THING claimed was "Unpatriotic". It is now, $15 Trillion, and CLIMBING. $6 Trillion in less that 3 Years.

Why don't you do everyone a FAVOUR, and go someplace else, to peddle your garbage?

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 11:32AM

Apparently, you cannot count ... Reagan 2.2 Trillion, Bush I 2.8 trillion, Bush II 5.7 Trillion with 1 Trillion before Reagan came in and Clinton added 1 Trillion ... add it all up - all public record, you can look it up ... Fixed News lies to you.
Why don't you do YOURSELF a favor and go do your homework before talking out of your a* . So go blame the right people, not who you've been TOLD to blame, you sheep. Are you stupid, ignorant or just evil?

big bob| 12.2.11 @ 12:07PM

Just as I would tell a 3rd grader who is making up an answer for his math problem...you are making the claim, incorrectly, with the incorrect connections, I might add. It's up to YOU to show the source and show your work. We ALL know that spending begins and ends with Congress, at least according to a fast fading Constitution. We ALL know that Tip O'neill, who like Reid and Pelosi hated Bush, hated Reagan and did everything he could under the table to make him look bad, such as reneging on his pledge to cut spending.

So you tell US where you got the numbers. No one in this forum actually believes what you say as you embarrass yourself at every turn. I will watch your response, and with little doubt it will entail a boorish criticism of anything I've said and an ad hominem attack on me. I am pretty sure there will be no numbers, references or sources in your response? Care to show me wrong? bring it on.... heh, heh.

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 2:36PM

Well, let's see, this took me about 1.5 minutes to find, from a source you would accept - Fox News:
http://nation.foxnews.com/us-d...../chart-day

It's about a year old, but Im sure you can tell the National Debt was < 1 Trillion until Reagan came into office and has gone nearly straight up from Reagan to Bush I, with a little dip during Clinton's terms, and up,up again under Bush II .. and yes still up under Obama. But - if you can add numbers from the graph, you will see I was right and you are so full of yourself and IT. You would like to think the Republicants are fiscally sound - please, not a chance, and this graph proves it. There are many other sources for this with more detail, but you wouldn't believe anyone but Fox News ... so explain again how this is all Obama and the Democrats fault? Or will u just go away in a huff and call me names, 'cause you lost the argument. FACTS are on my side, even facts from your own special news source - Fox News. So don't argue with me again, unless you armed with REAL facts next time - not opinion and bloviating balderdash.

big bob| 12.2.11 @ 3:44PM

Hey genius, I'm still looking for numbers. That tiny little chart doesn't do junk. Furthermore, the deficit is the real deal, not the debt. EVen though the debt balances show BHO's ridiculous run up of our overall obligations, the deficit table is what shows your boy to be the spendthrift he really is. This is bad formatting, can't help it. Column on right shows ridiculous increase of the deficit. If you need to learn the difference between debt and deficit, ...look it up. Facts are facts, and they are NOT on your side. Bush was no friend of mine with respect to the deficit. But Obama should be tried with treason for what he is doing to our country.

ederal Deficit -fed
$ billion
1990 5800.5 221.03 a
1991 5992.1 269.24 a
1992 6342.3 290.32 a
1993 6667.4 255.05 a
1994 7085.2 203.18 a
1995 7414.7 163.95 a
1996 7838.5 107.43 a
1997 8270.46 21.89 a
1998 8727.02 -69.27 a
1999 9286.86 -125.61 a
2000 9884.17 -236.24 a
2001 10218 -128.23 a
2002 10572.4 157.75 a
2003 11067.8 377.59 a
2004 11788.9 412.73 a
2005 12554.5 318.35 a
2006 13310.9 248.18 a
2007 13969.3 160.71 a
2008 14270.5 458.55 a
2009 14014.8 1412.69 a
2010 14551.8 1293.49 a
2011 15079.6 1298.61 a
2012 15812.5 1101.24 b
2013 16752.4 767.54 b
2014 17782.2 644.55 b
2015 18804.1 606.73 b
2016 19790.5 648.71

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 4:28PM

You are so wrong - when the interest payments on the National Debt exceed National Defense, maybe you'll wake up. The Debt does matter, just as does the deficit - but the debt is what weighs down the economy. Italy, Greece, you name it - it's the National Debt that is the big concern. Deficit bad, yes, but not nearly as powerful as the debt. Maybe you don't know the difference between the deficit and the debt. I do, Do you? Prove it.
Now, looking at your numbers, it's interesting that the deficit grows smaller as Clinton's term started in 1993 until we were in surplus years - and then steadily larger as Bush's term started in 2001 and continues up until 2009, which is when Obama took over. Then it has fallen almost each year and on a steady decline. I'd like your source for this information though.
where in the world did these numbers come from? from 2008-2009 the debt went down? I dont think so. Interesting how Obama is reining in Bush's last deficit of 2009 of 1.4 Trillion then falling to 1.29T and then 1.29 T and then 1.1 T next year and so on downward trend to 2016.
Thank you for showing how I was right all along, although you don't include the 80's here, would be even more interesting.
Now, as far as picking numbers off a graph, that's an exercise learned in school - perhaps you were sick that day, in any case, the fact you cannot read the graph is not my problem, nor my problem to solve.
Perhaps you could provide a link rather than just a column of numbers - I did. OR are you saying you aren't as good as I am? Prove your facts with backup material. Even though I like the data that supports my argument, you should provide the source. Oh and don't forget you're going to explain the difference between deficit and debt to us all - you that know so much... and you, hmmmmm?

jan| 12.2.11 @ 3:27PM

It took the above mentioned presidents each EIGHT YEARS to accumulate this debt,and that was wrong.
It took the lying golfer in chief less than 3 years to increase it by $ 5 trillion. You're a real math genius and a lul. (Dutch; look it up.)

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 4:11PM

Doesn't matter, Republicant presidents were as guilty or more so than any Democrat, including Obama. The graph proves it, even if Bob doesn't know how to read a graph. Moreover, is you really knew anything about how government works, which you clearly don't, the first budget year of Obama's term started in October 2008, from Bush, so you can cut you numbers by that much Chuckles. If you think Obama is so bad, you don't have to inflate the numbers now would you?

skip| 12.4.11 @ 2:56AM

Pimplepus,

This is just a typical ordinary example of why you are an idiot.

And pathetic.

And despicable.

And stupid.

And a liar.

The Office of Management and Budget, at whitehouse.gov/omb/, which I've only cited here slightly less times than dollars the nation is in debt, shows the information.

Presidents take office with that existing year's budget already established by the preceding year's House of Representatives, as the House of Representatives are constitutionally tasked with establishing spending and taxes, and the budget showing an accounting of them.

I've broken each president into two terms, the years they actually served their term, and the years they served offset the one year to account for the budgets when they served, the budgets determined each year by the House of Representatives, which I've referred to as budget term.

Reagan term 1981-1989:
$1.338557 trillion deficit

Reagan budget term 1982-1990:
$1.412228 trillion deficit

Bush I term 1989-1993:
$0.933234 trillion deficit

Bush I budget term 1990-1994:
$1.035646 trillion deficit

Bush II term 2001-2009:
$2.005615 trillion deficit

Bush II budget term 2002-2010:
$3.546539 trillion deficit

The House of Representatives, who are responsible for the budget, was democrat all 8 years of the Reagan term.

The House of Representatives was democrat all 4 years of the Bush I term.

The House of Representatives was democrat the last 2 of the 8 years of the Bush II term.

52.8% of the Bush II term deficit was the last 2 democrat controlled House of Representatives.

47.2% of the Bush II term deficit was the first 6 republican controlled House of Representatives.

I've broken each president into two terms, one actual and one offset by the budget, because Obama added his stimulus to the last year of the Bush II budget term in 2010, which even a stupid lying idiot such as Pimplepus can admit is Obama's deficit even though it is in Bush II's last year.

Reagan, Bush I, Bush II terms 20 years:
$4.277406 trillion deficit

Reagan, Bush I, Bush II budget terms 20 years:
$5.994413 trillion deficit

This under $6 trillion total deficit for all 20 years of Reagan, Bush I, Bush II includes Obama stimulus deficit under the last Bush II year.

Obama term 2009-2011:
$4.351296 trillion deficit

Obama budget term 2010-2011:
$2.938608 trillion deficit

Reagan, Bush I, Bush II terms 20 year average per year:
$0.213870 trillion deficit

Reagan, Bush I, Bush II budget terms 20 year average per year:
$0.299721 trillion deficit

Obama term 3 year average per year:
$1.450432 trillion deficit

Obama budget term 2 year average per year:
$1.469304 trillion deficit

2007, the last Bush II year with a republican controlled House of Representatives:
$0.160701 trillion deficit

2011, the last Obama year with a democrat controlled House of Representatives:
$1.645119 trillion deficit

Obama $1.645119 trillion deficit in last year of democrat House in 2011 is more than 1,023% higher than bush II $0.160701 trillion deficit in last year of republican House in 2007.

Clinton term 1993-2001:
$0.320383 trillion deficit

Clinton budget term 1994-2002:
$0.062904 surplus

The House of Representatives, who are responsible for the budget, was republican the last 6 of the 8 years of the Clinton term.

The first 2 democrat controlled House of Representatives of the Clinton term was a $0.367138 trillion deficit.

The last 6 republican controlled House of Representatives of the Clinton term was a $0.430042 trillion surplus.

Idiot.

Occam's Tool| 12.2.11 @ 10:17PM

Hey, guys...socialized medicine can cure our energy problems!

"In Durham, England, corpses will soon be used to generate electricity.

A crematorium is installing turbines in its burners that will convert waste heat from the combustion of each corpse into as much as 150 kilowatt-hours of juice — enough to power 1,500 televisions for an hour. The facility plans to sell the electricity to local power companies.

Some might find this concept creepy. Others might be pleased to learn that the process "makes cremation much greener by utilizing its by-products," in the words of cremation engineer Steve Looker, owner and chief executive officer of the Florida-based company B&L Cremation Systems, which is unaffiliated with the Durham enterprise.

In Europe, tightening regulations on crematorium emissions, coupled with the high price of energy, will lead more and more facilities to go the way of Durham in the future, Looker said. Will crematories in the United States follow suit?

According to Looker, whose company is currently testing different methods of utilizing cremation waste heat, the expensive turbine systems being installed in Durham are not yet economically viable for crematories here. "In the U.S., most crematories don't have enough throughput," he told Life's Little Mysteries. "Cremation in some parts of Europe is over 90 percent, but it is not over 50 percent yet here." That is, less than half of Americans opt for cremation. Most are buried.

Consequently, while burners in Europe typically run 24 hours day, ones in America operate only eight hours each day, Looker said. "A typical turbine system would cost somewhere between $250,000 to $500,000. If it's running 24 hours a day, that's a five-year payback. If it's running eight hours a day, that's a 15- or 20-year payback, which isn't feasible," he said.

However, Looker is hopeful that the situation could change in the near future. "Over the next 10 years, with the baby boomers coming through, cremation is going to reach 75 to 80 percent. Then, this might be feasible."

Furthermore, a turbine designed by a company called Thermal Dynamic Engineering, which produces just 50 kilowatt-hours of energy but is much less expensive to install than the Durham system, will be available in the near future, Looker said.

Thus, it may indeed come to pass that deceased baby boomers will someday help power your household appliances. "

From MSNBC website, today.

Timothy L. Pennell| 12.3.11 @ 7:04AM

I can't believe they're gonna burn dead bodies.
It seems like a big waste of perfectly good SOYLENT.

Mac Jehoff| 12.2.11 @ 8:41AM

Ms.Tavenner may be able to use her experience at HCA to root out fraud and waste in CMA . On the other hand, she also knows how to game the system and can channel funds to her cronies.

Nancy in NC| 12.2.11 @ 9:04AM

Does a tiger change its stripes? It's like putting the fox in charge of the hen house.

Anthony| 12.2.11 @ 8:55AM

It's long past time that Congress got off its ass and used what power it has under the Constitution to eliminate or defund these unconstitutional tzars.
Somebody wake up Boehner and hand him a hanky to wipe his tears away.

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 10:32AM

Don't be stupid - Czar is your term - they are simply division or agency chiefs given that name to make sure y'all are scared of the Communists and Socialists that are coming for you and to eat your children... what a pile of s* and y'all believe it. Are you stupid, ignorant or just plain evil?

Teaghan| 12.2.11 @ 12:19PM

Mr. Purple, how is it that you can't see what obama and his henchmen are doing? Do you want socialism? Do you want us to be beholding to China from now until doomsday? Why do you defend this fool that lies daily, vacations and vacations, uses taxpayer dollars to campain while he raises millions for said campaign? How do you defend this?

Kingofthenet| 12.2.11 @ 12:40PM

Ray LaHood is NOT the 'Car Czar' he is the Secretary of Transportation, but Glenn Beck wants you to be SCARED!

Timothy L. Pennell| 12.2.11 @ 3:22PM

That's why we call them: USEFUL IDIOTS.

DRed| 12.2.11 @ 5:57PM

I suppose that would make you a useless idiot, Timmy?

Anthony| 12.2.11 @ 1:48PM

No moron, Obozo and the MSM use the term regularly. If they are simply agency chiefs,why is it that Obozo circumvents normal hiring practices and appoints these folks without congressonal approval?
And yes, we are scared of Obozo's legions of Marxists that are populating our government. You're just too stupid or braindead to see what's coming.
I guess one has to be in the 1% to have the intelligence and common sense to see it. The good news is, that you moron, and your ilk, will be the first ones to be crushed by Obozo.

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 2:54PM

Because he can, just as Bush appointed them before him ...
Since I AM in the 2%, not 1%, I have no fear of either party ... I have mine, I worry more about children and family members - but the Republicants are not helping you get yours and especially if you are in the "they never will get theirs" you are hurt by Republicants policies. If you like the dog eat dog world when your elderly, a child, sick or injured, in some way incapable of working, then by all means cozy up to the Republicants ... They are just like the teachers, altho not all teachers, who always gave favortism to the "A" students. They wanted to help the A students, associate with the 'A' students, but not the "lazy" 'C' students, or the students that were tired because they worked at night but were classified as' trouble'. Sound familiar? And, yet, you don't see through the propaganda dished out by the right to make sure YOU support the 'A' students at the expense of you, the 'C' students.
If you're really honest with yourselves you can look over the legislation passed during Obama's term and see who has tried to help the least of us, while protecting the rest of us from what the 'A' students did during the Bush terms, to keep them from doing it again.
If you don't see it, you have no idea the kind of real world behind what the Republicants romanticize for you to follow them. It's brutal, no holds barred and may the strongest, smartest, most dishonest and devious win. We've seen that playbook before ... you can watch it on cable TV - it was called Germany before WWII. Now it's the Democrats who are the "enemy", not the jews, but the process is the same. And, you all still don't see it.
BTW - the entire world is a mix of Socialism and Capitalism, including us, so that ship has sailed. When you say Communists - you really mean dictatorship, which is more like fascism, because Marxism does not espouse totalitarianism. You should read Naomi Wolf's book " The End of America" if you want a better understanding of today around you and where we could be going.

Anthony| 12.2.11 @ 3:44PM

Which is it moron? Either they are not tzars, as you first stated, and became indignant at my use of the term, or now, yes they are, but Bush did it too!!, which he most certainaly did not!!
The rest of your rant is nothing more than a spew of incoherent leftist vomit.
You are a pathetic, hysterical, irrational fool. I pity you.

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 4:31PM

You are so dumb, falling for all the media's tricks - as if Fixed News is above those tricks - or did you miss that one too, Sunshine?
Do you know what a czar really is? Do you know why they labelled them czars?

Brubaker| 12.3.11 @ 1:27PM

That's "Republicans," not "Republicants." Learn how to spell dipstick -- or do you imagine that you're somehow being cute?

Purpleguy| 12.3.11 @ 5:28PM

Tell me what can Republicants actually do... that was intentional and will continue to be until they do something to compromise with the D's and do something for the people that are hurting with underwater mortgages, joblessness, homelessness. Until they do, they are RepubliCANTS.

Dick Nome | 12.2.11 @ 3:59PM

WHere is a Purple-People Eater when you really need one??

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 4:32PM

I'm right here counting my money..

Kingofthenet| 12.2.11 @ 9:04AM

Most People never even HEARD of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), it sounds like some Think-Tank, but in reality it funnels a sizable portion of the American Economy.

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 10:33AM

You mean like the CIO of defense?

Occam's Tool| 12.2.11 @ 10:18PM

Oh, I have. I have. Scum.

Purpleguy| 12.3.11 @ 5:30PM

Moreover, it sets guidelines for Medicare, is not dictatorial and is composed of physicians as well to provide oversight to avoid fraud, abuse and waste. You have a problem with that?

SGT Tony| 12.5.11 @ 5:43AM

The problem is that CMS is yet another government agency that wields far more power than it should. Why does it exist?
Does it do anything that other agencies do not do?
And if it does, can it be merged (and shrunk) into another agency?
There are too many 'agencies'.

Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 10:53PM

Yes, I do. The MDs are sell-outs to a population practice model, otherwise known as rationing.

Purpleguy, if you ever had to fight to get a lifesaving treatment through a bureaucracy, you'd understand. If you did so knowing that you weren't going to get paid for the time you spent battling the hydra, and that only you were fighting in your patient's interest, you'd understand even better. Anything that sets guidelines for Medicare IS Dictatorial. You have no idea how Medicare decisions affect the rest of the insurance decisions. In fact, you are simply clueless.

Stormy| 12.2.11 @ 9:32AM

"it's surprising that even the famously tone deaf Obama would nominate someone with such problematic ties to the industry she will regulate."

No, it's not. She is exactly what you would expect from the Fraus-in-Chief. Obama does nothing without intent. If you can have Kathleen Sebelieus, then you certainly can have Marilyn Tavenner.

Teaghan| 12.2.11 @ 12:19PM

Angels of death.

sinz54| 12.2.11 @ 10:11AM

Look, Obama is a liberal Democrat, and he's going to choose liberal Democrats to staff his Cabinet departments. That's understandable.

Berwick was a different story. To tout the British NHS as the greatest thing in health care puts him way out in left field, way beyond even liberals who advocate a single-payer health care system. (Unlike Canada's single-payer, in the British NHS the Government runs the hospitals and the doctors are civil servants paid a salary by the Government.)

The same thing is true in economics. We should expect an Obama appointee to endorse traditional Keynesian economic pump-priming. But if an appointee starts openly claiming that Marxism-Leninism was cool, that's unacceptable.

big bob| 12.2.11 @ 12:12PM

except that he is a Marxist, not a liberal dem. and he continues to ignore any constitutional restrictions on his behavior, while appointing his unconstitutional czars to act apart from any accountability. As for economics, he is neither. He wants the destruction of this economy in order to remake it in his socialist Marxist ideology. He has had plenty of his czars sing the praises of Marxism.

jan| 12.2.11 @ 3:32PM

Big Bob, Indeed , what about Van Jones, the commie, and Anita Dunn, Mao is one of her hero's.
Or Kevin Jennings , who teaches " FISTING" to junior high school boys. Check out the background of all the czars, you'll be appalled .

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 4:33PM

And, let me guess who the source of your information is, hmmmm? Rush Loudmouth, Fixed News or National Enquirer - oh, even better - the now defunct News of the World rag.

Konnie| 12.2.11 @ 10:25PM

Answer her, PG. Who cares where she got it, it's true, is it not? There is none so blind as he who will not see.

Occam's Tool| 12.2.11 @ 10:19PM

sinz54: the Docs in Canada are also government run and essentially employees---after a certain point of income, their receipts are taxed extremely highly---that's why they come to the US for locums jobs for that timeperiod.

Teaghan| 12.2.11 @ 12:13PM

"It hardly seems wise to put her in charge of the government system her company helped defraud." And yet Tavenner is the President's nominee to replace Donald Berwick

Maybe that's why obama hired her :-)

Teaghan| 12.2.11 @ 12:21PM

"We're going to fundamentally change America"

And the crowds went wild, the women swooned.

Anthony| 12.2.11 @ 2:09PM

...and later, when the truth became obvious, the useful idiots became the first to be crushed.

Redstateboy| 12.2.11 @ 2:47PM

How is it these trolls like Tavenner swing from one bloated federal bureacracy gig to another to another.. and earn... what?! Fat salaries and Fat pensions - while we.. Slaves (and the fools like Purpleguy) labor under them.. We need a Revolution again or.. in Purpleguy's case, a Civil War; to sweep away this Liber-ul trash.

Purpleguy| 12.2.11 @ 4:34PM

Bring it on, Red Commie Boy ... typical misdirection in all your comments .. say one thing, do another.

Nite| 12.2.11 @ 7:17PM

She is just as bad as Berwick. Surprise Surprise!

POST American| 12.2.11 @ 10:21PM

------Sideshows on the Titanic.

MEANWHILE,

----AMERICANS to be stripped of ALLLL rights---
-----------under the, about to be made law------------
---------------------SECTION 1031----------------------

Siezure, stripping of citizenship, exile, indefinite
and undisclosed detention ----and EXECUTION
without warning, without explanation.

----------this is TOTAL--'IT'--tearian EVIL----------
------------------and WE are the 'ITs'-------------------

"Remember, in this Globalist order,
there will be NO complaint department.
None. ABSOLUTELY NONE."

AGAIN, for the reality challenged:

---------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012----------------

Concrete Cowboy| 12.3.11 @ 3:33PM

It wouldn't be the first time a woman of her ilk "worked" her way to the top. And...what is Eric Cantor thinking? Or did he also receive "favors" from her too. Be careful whom you associate yourself with Eric Cantor.

Peter Yankov| 12.4.11 @ 1:21PM

Cantor has become just another DC Repubican Establishment insider. He want the opposition to like him. He is of the McCain/ Grahamesty type except he's in the House and is one of Speaker Bonehead's guys.

Rich Rostrom| 12.3.11 @ 11:32PM

Jane Orient is a professional conservative activist and her "Association of American Physicians and Surgeons" has only a handful of members.

I pretty much agree with her opinions, but I object to her posing as a spokesman for American doctors - and to her being quoted as such.

Peter Yankov| 12.4.11 @ 1:34PM

So who is spokesman for American doctors. We know it isn't the AMA.

Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 10:55PM

No one, anymore, really.

Occam's Tool| 12.22.11 @ 10:55PM

I'm one. There's lots. Ron Paul's another---and on this I agree with him---and if you know my opinion on Paul, you can imagine how unusual this is, and what it means.

chaussures air max | 12.5.11 @ 1:46AM

Surprise !!

wedding dresses | 12.6.11 @ 3:32AM

----AMERICANS to be stripped of ALLLL rights---
-----------under the, about to be made law------------
---------------------SECTION 1031----------------------

More Articles by David Catron

More Articles From The Right Prescription

Time to Go for the Kill

May 22, 2013 | Peter Ferrara

Sebelius’s Monkey Business

May 15, 2013 | Betsy McCaughey

Unhealthy Immigration Reform

April 17, 2013 | Betsy McCaughey

The Wheels Come Off Obamacare

April 15, 2013 | David Catron

Giant Bills Make Bad Laws

April 10, 2013 | Betsy McCaughey

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/02/donald-berwicks-replacement

ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Headlines

Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment

George Neumayr|150 comments

Damage Control for Dummies

Matt Purple|84 comments

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara|64 comments

Restrain the Abusive Administative State

Doug Bandow|23 comments

Disabling American Sovereignty

Iain Murray|13 comments

The Other Gosnells

Jordan Gonzalez|13 comments

Can He Unite Virginia’s GOP?

Carten Cordell|31 comments

Undoing the Brainwashing

Thomas Sowell|26 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Issa Recovers

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

The Religion of Peace Strikes London Again

Aaron Goldstein | 5.22.13

Not Just the Media: First Amendment Under Attack

Quin Hillyer | 5.22.13

House Judiciary: Constitutional Rights Vital in Wartime

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.22.13

U.S. Admits 4 Americans Killed by Drones

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.22.13

Colorado Governor Gives “Reprieve” to Murderer

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

Steven Crowder: Jesus vs. Muhammad

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

Kaminsky’s Corollary to I, Pencil

Ross Kaminsky | 5.22.13

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.