More Questions for the White House on Berwick Appointment
I wanted to highlight comments from Monday’s White House press briefing, where Robert Gibbs was again asked about the President’s recess appointment of Don Berwick to head the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Mr. Gibbs admitted that the President likely never asked for a hearing on his nominee (and for that matter, he didn’t publicly demand a vote either). Gibbs also sidestepped a question suggesting that the Finance Committee could have held a hearing in July, with a recess appointment in August “if there’s a blockage” later in the process. And he noted the Administration did not want to be “waiting around” to allow the Senate to complete its constitutional duty to provide “advice and consent” – even though that process had barely begun, because the majority refused to schedule a hearing.
Amidst all the talk of “waiting around,” It’s also worth noting that the Senate spent 454 days “waiting around” for the White House to nominate Dr. Berwick in the first place – and Republicans spent an additional 79 days “waiting around” for the Finance Committee to schedule a hearing. Given that Mr. Gibbs once again stated that “this wasn’t a hearing problem,” it’s worth asking how long Republicans will be “waiting around” for the Finance Committee to schedule a hearing on Dr. Berwick’s still-pending nomination for a permanent appointment at CMS.
Video of the exchange can be found here, and a transcript follows below.
Q Thank you, Robert. You point out frequently the differences between this administration and the previous administration. With the latest recess appointment, the obvious question is, why do you simply not wait for the confirmation process to go through and submit it to a Senate when they schedule a hearing before the appropriate committee and —
MR. GIBBS: This wasn’t a hearing problem, right? This is — we’ve had plenty of nominees that have had hearings that wait months and months and months and months before the Senate will be allowed to take it up. And what I mean, be allowed to take it up, meaning simply getting unanimous consent to have a debate and a vote. Sometimes after 10 months of waiting, that unanimous consent is gotten and the approval of the nominees is unanimous.
And then one simply wonders why we’ve waited 10 months. The health care law —
Q So you’re saying the Senate was too slow on Berwick, is what it is?
MR. GIBBS: I will tell you, there are those in the Senate that had no intention of dealing with this nomination other than to play the political game —
Q But how do know — are you that cynical of the process already that you don’t even want to see it play its way through?
MR. GIBBS: I’m not a cynical person. I just have ample evidence — 21 times — 21 times. Let me compare the Bush administration and the previous administration and find a break. On 21 occasions, unanimous consent was blocked in order to — and cloture had to be invoked to get somebody a vote — 21 occasions. In the first year of the Bush administration, how many times did that happen? How many times did that happen?
Q Did the President ever take —
MR. GIBBS: How many times did that happen? How many times did that happen?
Q How many?
MR. GIBBS: How many? Zero. Zero. And guess what, both of you knew the answer to that.
Q Did the President ever ask — Chairman Baucus for a hearing?
MR. GIBBS: Did who?
Q Did the President ever ask the Chairman for —
MR. GIBBS: Not to my knowledge.
Yes, sir.
Q Robert, on Israel and Iran —
Q Excuse me, Robert. How can you complain then about the process when the President —
MR. GIBBS: Because as I said, this wasn’t a hearing. This wasn’t an issue about a hearing. This is your latest attempt to decide that the process was being upheld because there hadn’t been a hearing scheduled. The hearing wasn’t a problem, right? If there would have been a hearing, he would have gotten out. And guess what. Months and months and months would have passed before anybody would have consented to simply taking up the nomination.
Now, we passed a law — Health Care Affordable Care Act that has to be implemented. There are things that have to be implemented by the first of the year per the law. We are not going to wait for those in the Senate that want to see this delayed and delayed and delayed before —
Q Well, Robert —
MR. GIBBS: Let me finish my answer — before this is taken up.
Now, I know there’s these grand conspiracy theories, right, that somehow the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, the American Association of Retired Persons, Mark McClellan, and Tom Scully seem clearly not to be complicit in, in supporting somebody amply qualified to run CMS and to implement the law. And that’s what the President sought to do.
Q Well, why not have a hearing where all of that can be decided in July and if there’s a blockage, a recess appointment in August?
MR. GIBBS: Because — because, Major, we’re not going to —
Q What you just described would not be affected by that. He’d still be in place.
MR. GIBBS: Absolutely. What’s today? July 12th — we got three weeks until August. We’re going to implement the law, Major. We’re not going to wait around —
Q If you had a hearing in July and a recess appointment in August —
MR. GIBBS: No, no, no. We’re not going to wait around for the same old people to play the same old political games time after time after time. We’re just not waiting around for that.