How about Rham's brother for HHS?

[mucifer]

No not that brother. The medical ethicist.

From the NIH website:
Our People
Ezekiel J. Emanuel, MD, PhD

Ezekiel J. Emanuel is the Chair of the Department of Bioethics at The Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health. He is also a breast oncologist.

After completing Amherst College, he received his M.Sc. from Oxford University in Biochemistry. He received his M.D. from Harvard Medical School and his Ph.D. in political philosophy from Harvard University. His dissertation received the Toppan Award for the finest political science dissertation of the year. In 1987-88, he was a fellow in the Program in Ethics and the Professions at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard.

After completing his internship and residency in internal medicine at Boston's Beth Israel Hospital and his oncology fellowship at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, he joined the faculty at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Dr. Emanuel was an Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School before joining the National Institutes of Health.

Dr. Emanuel developed The Medical Directive, a comprehensive living will that has been endorsed by Consumer Reports on Health, Harvard Health Letter, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and many other publications. He has published widely on the ethics of clinical research, health care reform, international research ethics, end of life care issues, euthanasia, the ethics of managed care, and the physician-patient relationship in the New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, JAMA, and many other medical journals. His book on medical ethics, The Ends of Human Life, has been widely praised and received honorable mention for the Rosenhaupt Memorial Book Award by the Woodrow Wilson Foundation. He has also published No Margin, No Mission: Health-Care Organizations and the Quest for Ethical Excellence and co-edited Ethical and Regulatory Aspects of Clinical Research: Readings and Commentary. Dr. Emanuel has written extensively for the popular press, with articles and op-eds appearing in The Atlantic, The New Republic, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and many other publications.

Dr. Emanuel has received numerous awards including election to the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academy of Science and the Association of American Physicians. Hippocrates Magazine selected him as Doctor of the Year in Ethics. He received the AMA-Burroughs Welcome Leadership Award, the Public Service Award from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the John Mendelsohn Award from the MD Anderson Cancer Center, and a Fulbright Scholarship (which he declined).

http://www.bioethics.nih.gov/people/emanuel-bio.shtml

He even did a segment on PBS's NOW with Broncoccio on Universal health care.
link: http://www.pbs.org/now/news/315.html

[saracat]

1. Ugh. Rahm is bad enough. That family doesn't need any more influence.

[mod mom]

15. Agree. If Dean is out for partisanship reasons would an Emmanuel also incur the

wrath of the GOP?

I say screw them (GOP), they are going to work for what's best for the nation, and neither is anyone with corporate interest ties, so choose Dean, a pragmatist and let the people lead.

[Occam Bandage]

2. Rahm. nt

[wyldwolf]

3. as good, or better, than many being pushed

[firedupdem]

4. Unfortunately we need someone that has a relationship with

these assholes in DC to get anything passed. The person who could get it done is gone now due to his tax error. This is a major setback. The person with the best contacts is out.

[Aloha Spirit]

5. He's already advising Obama... didn't I read that a couple weeks ago? nt

[mucifer]

6. That's a good thing.

[firedupdem]

7. Good...he sounds like he has great credentials. n/t

[elleng]

8. Lets NOT take people out of jobs they're good at,

and 'elevate' them to other positions.

[Alcibiades]

9. Dean

I'm no Dean supporter, at least not when he was a presidential candidate, but I say Dean.

[Dragonfli]

10. It would certainly make insurance companies happy

Based on the NOW piece, insurers are at the center of the whole scam, would get paid an added %10 sales tax and would only have to offer "basic" plans for all this largess. Special plans for rich folks. 30 to 40 percent for the middle men that provide what health service exactly? Denials?

I don't think he would be any better than the best paid lobbyist for Univera would be, that is to say that the DLC and voucher loving Republicans will just love him.

Sounds like who they will pick.
Congrats, you floated the name first before it is a done deal.

[slipslidingaway]

12. Republicans will love the voucher idea and so will businesses

when their cost for HC goes to zero.

Just not sure about that value added tax :(

[slipslidingaway]

11. K&R for more exposure n/t

[Honeycombe8]

13. How 'bout his mother? She's elderly and probably sick, so she must know plenty about

health care.

And his dad could be in charge of the interior, since he likes to go driving on Sundays and look at pine trees.

[slipslidingaway]

14. ... n/t

[ClarkUSA]

16. John Podesta will probably get it -- he's got the contacts, the goodwill, and the experience.

[slipslidingaway]

17. Part of the plan...

"...DR. EMANUEL: Our proposal is for universal healthcare vouchers. It's a plan where everybody in America gets a voucher to buy health insurance from an insurance company or health plan or a managed care organization. And they get a basic benefits package. If they want to buy more, they want—wider choice of doctors, they want better services, say, better eye glass services, or they want more mental health services, they can pay more and they can buy up.....


....DR. EMANUEL: Right. Well, if the states aren't paying Medicaid anymore, and employers aren't paying for insurance, we would have to find the money to pay for this. We wouldn't add more money, but we'd—you'd have to get basically—recoup somehow how employers are paying for it and how the states are paying for Medicaid. And that would be—we've proposed to finance this by a value added tax.

That means that, when you buy something, the added value is taxed. The tax would be about eight to ten of purchases—if you eliminate food and some other items that—poor people disproportionately buy. And, again—it—you're going to have to pay for this somehow. It is going to be a tax.

BRANCACCIO: This seems a little shocking if you add the ten percent to the nine percent sales tax they're already charging in California. Nineteen percent sales tax..."