Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In 2014, The Obama Dictatorship Will Be Complete
The Western Center for Journalism ^ | July 9, 2012 | Doug Book

Posted on 07/09/2012 1:30:33 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

Though few Americans are aware of it, the unconscionable ObamaCare ruling of Chief Justice John Roberts stands to provide Barack Hussein Obama unlimited and fundamentally irrevocable power less than 2 years after the November election. For should he win, Obama will acquire the “legal” authority to select 15 individuals whose word will automatically become the law of the land.

Within the 2500 pages of the comically-named Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is cached the 2014 establishment of the Independent Payment Advisory Board. Nominated exclusively by the president, the 15 members of the Board will ostensibly be tasked with “…prevent[ing] per-enrollee Medicare spending from growing faster than a specified target rate.” To accomplish this congressional mandate, ObamaCare has provided the Board with the authority to submit legislative “proposals” to Congress; proposals which will automatically become law unless both Houses AND the President agree upon and pass into law a substitute measure.

In short, “the Board’s edicts …become law without congressional action, congressional approval, meaningful congressional oversight, or being subject to a presidential veto.” Moreover, citizens will have NO authority to challenge the Board’s pronouncements in court, for ObamaCare “…specifically states that the Secretary [of Health and Human Service’s] implementation of IPAB’s proposals is not judicially reviewable.” Therefore a group of presidential, POLITICAL appointees will have the practical power of shaping and imposing upon the American public, the laws of the land! For in addition to creating edicts loosely attached to Medicare and its myriad applications, in 2015 the IPAB will be permitted to impose price controls, taxes and “…ration care for all Americans whether the government pays their medical bills or not!” Thus even the Medicare stipulation will no longer be a practical deterrent to the Board’s authority.

How is all of this possible? According to the Cato Institute, “…by carving out a discrete list of limitations on the Board’s delegated powers, the [Affordable Care] Act implicitly gives IPAB otherwise unlimited power to exercise any enumerated congressional power with respect to any governmental body, industry, property, product, person, service or activity.” And just like Congress, the IPAB has been given the authority to appropriate federal funds and impose conditions for their receipt. This means “the Board could propose…to require states to implement federal laws or to enact new state laws in order to receive federal funding.”

Incredibly, Congress does not have the authority to do away with the IPAB until 2017, when a 3/5 vote by both Houses must accompany the signature of the President! Clearly, Barack Obama and the radically leftist, 2008 congress went to extraordinary lengths to shelter their conspiratorial overthrow of our constitutional Republic from standard methods of repeal.

Should the Manchurian Candidate be returned to the White House, does anyone believe he would not nominate to the IPAB a select coterie of like-minded, Marxist plutocrats, eager to wrench by any means from the American people their last remaining vestige of individual liberty?

Did John Roberts realize that his constitutionally depraved ruling would provide the America hating Obama with literal, dictatorial authority over the government, people and future of the United States? If so, the Chief Justice has assumed his place in history as a traitor of unmatched ability.

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Conspiracy; Government; Health/Medicine
KEYWORDS: 2012; democrats; obama; obamacare; obamacaredecision; obamadictator; robertsdecision
1 posted on 07/09/2012 1:30:44 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

And just why are these aspects of the Act not the subject of the nightly news and Sunday talk shows?

If this is’s huge! All Romney has to do is appear at a press conference...announce these facts and it’s over for The One.

What’s taking so long?

2 posted on 07/09/2012 1:36:41 PM PDT by kjo (+)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Someone got to Roberts.

This is so dangerous!

3 posted on 07/09/2012 1:48:54 PM PDT by freemama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The only possible happy face we can put on CJ Roberts rubber stamping this horror, is to credit him with a Machiavellian genius none of us suspected, because to believe that his idiotic reasonings were even comprehensible is a joke.

IF, Roberts knew what he was doing, he had to figure that we can’t survive another 4 years of this, and not only that Romney is going to replace Zero, but that Romney on his own is worse than useless.

To truly get rid of O’care is going to take super majorities in both houses just to go find all of the funding dodges, like State Insurance Exchanges, which are buried in other Bills.

I’d Like to think that CJ Roberts thought he was figuratively throwing himself on his own sword in the hope that his ruling would so infuriate the country, that come November, we’ll Get those super majorities as a blow back against all the crooked scum in Congress who did this to us to begin with.

I realize of course that ascribing noble motives of self sacrifice, honor, duty and country to Most politicians is a dead horse, but at this point, I’m hoping he talked long and hard to Old St Nick (Machiavel) before he sided with the Left to uphold this, and I hope it does infuriate voters into landslide wins for conservatives.

Frog in the pot on the stove? Did Roberts turn the stove up Hot enough for the frog to jump?

4 posted on 07/09/2012 1:56:33 PM PDT by To-Whose-Benefit? (It is Error alone which needs the support of Government. The Truth can stand by itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The part of the law saying it is not reviewable is itself reviewable. And unconstitutional. Not that that means anything anymore...

5 posted on 07/09/2012 2:01:49 PM PDT by piytar (The predator-class is furious that their prey are shooting back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; All

Can someone get the doc and cut-n-paste the section of the law that does this? I’m pressed for time or I’d do it.

6 posted on 07/09/2012 2:07:00 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
If you have a rat rep or senator, remind them that with Obamacare they voted to reverse our Revolution. It will not be forgiven.
7 posted on 07/09/2012 2:08:01 PM PDT by Jacquerie (The American Revolution is dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The only reference to the Independent Payment Advisory Board in the main bill is below. It’s not in the reconciliation bill.

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than January 15, 2015, and
at least once every two years thereafter, the Board shall submit
to Congress and the President recommendations to slow the
growth in national health expenditures (excluding expenditures
under this title and in other Federal health care programs)
while preserving or enhancing quality of care, such as recommendations—
‘‘(A) that the Secretary or other Federal agencies can
implement administratively;
‘‘(B) that may require legislation to be enacted by Congress
in order to be implemented;
‘‘(C) that may require legislation to be enacted by State
or local governments in order to be implemented;
‘‘(D) that private sector entities can voluntarily implement;
‘‘(E) with respect to other areas determined appropriate
by the Board.
‘‘(2) COORDINATION.—In making recommendations under
paragraph (1), the Board shall coordinate such recommendations
with recommendations contained in proposals and
advisory reports produced by the Board under subsection (c).
‘‘(3) AVAILABLE TO PUBLIC.—The Board shall make recommendations
submitted to Congress and the President under
this subsection available to the public.’’.
(b) NAME CHANGE.—Any reference in the provisions of, or
amendments made by, section 3403 to the ‘‘Independent Medicare
Advisory Board’’ shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Independent
Payment Advisory Board’’.
(c) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in the amendments made
by this section shall preclude the Independent Medicare Advisory
Board, as established under section 1899A of the Social Security
Act (as added by section 3403), from solely using data from public
or private sources to carry out the amendments made by subsection

8 posted on 07/09/2012 2:19:13 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

We know that the SC can be manipulated by fear tactics. That makes us a “banana republic”.

9 posted on 07/09/2012 2:19:58 PM PDT by kenmcg (t)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Then the idea is fully developed here as the Independent Medicare Advisory Board:

(a) BOARD.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Title XVIII of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.), as amended by section 3022, is
amended by adding at the end the following new section:
‘‘SEC. 1899A. (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established an
independent board to be known as the ‘Independent Medicare
Advisory Board’.
‘‘(b) PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this section to, in accordance
with the following provisions of this section, reduce the per capita
rate of growth in Medicare spending—
‘‘(1) by requiring the Chief Actuary of the Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services to determine in each year to
which this section applies (in this section referred to as ‘a
determination year’) the projected per capita growth rate under
Medicare for the second year following the determination year
(in this section referred to as ‘an implementation year’);
‘‘(2) if the projection for the implementation year exceeds
the target growth rate for that year, by requiring the Board
to develop and submit during the first year following the determination
year (in this section referred to as ‘a proposal year’)
a proposal containing recommendations to reduce the Medicare
per capita growth rate to the extent required by this section;
‘‘(3) by requiring the Secretary to implement such proposals
unless Congress enacts legislation pursuant to this section.


I pulled this from

10 posted on 07/09/2012 2:22:27 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Congress has the authority to repeal anything at any time regardless of what the Obamacare law says.

Laws that state that they are not judicially reviewable are unconstitutional, and I think the EPA just found that out.

11 posted on 07/09/2012 2:27:37 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

This doesn’t have to be....

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was the widely accepted and revered leader of the task of taking his native India out of bondage to the British Empire, and his methods were to make the British so nettled, and inconvenienced by his methods, they finally decided the greater part of valor was to withdraw.

If we, as descendents of the most wrong-headed and intransigent masses who ever escaped from the traces of feudalism and despotic rule elsewhere in the world, cannot throw off a pipsqueak outfit like this failing current regime, then we probably DESERVE to succumb to oppressive conditions and lifelong servitude. There are so many ways to sabatoge and subvert the police state, particularly one that does not get into a whole-hearted campaign to jail and isolate every dissident, that they must either get really stringent, or get ridiculed out of town.

They simply do not have the cojones to get really stringent. For one thing, no matter what claims they make, they will not succeed in getting sidearms and even more powerful weaponry away from the citizenry, because this regime will not, cannot, sufficiently enforce the relevant statutes. If this means, in a purely legalistic sense, that laws are to be broken, well, nobody really breaks a law that isn’t enforced. Since this regime has chosen to be lawless, then that sets the rules of engagement.

Lawless it shall be, but that does not mean that justice will not be served. You are talking about a NATION of “cowboys”, and the rough code they subscribe to.

12 posted on 07/09/2012 2:46:52 PM PDT by alloysteel (Fear and intimidation work. At least on the short term.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Who needs a dictatorship when you have peronist Argentina right here home of the once free?

13 posted on 07/09/2012 2:48:31 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piytar

It is against the law for a law to be beyond legal review. And there are too many unemployed lawyers willing to challenge it, especially with aging baby boomers with money who will be told to go home and die.

14 posted on 07/09/2012 2:58:32 PM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tbw2

“It is against the law for a law to be beyond legal review.”

Can’t even Amend the Constitution with non reviewable, non reversible Amendments. Somebody needs to B’Slap these fools with what the 21st Amendment, “Reviewed”.

“It is against the Law.”

That doesn’t even Begin to express how D**n Illegal it is!

15 posted on 07/09/2012 3:07:01 PM PDT by To-Whose-Benefit? (It is Error alone which needs the support of Government. The Truth can stand by itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

NFIB et al. v. Sibelius did not raise the question of the constitutionality of the provisions of the law establishing the IPAB, and the SCOTUS did not rule on that those provisions were constitutional. The attempt to bind future Congresses is prima facia unconstitutional, and will surely be challenged on those grounds in due time.

16 posted on 07/09/2012 3:22:33 PM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freemama

“Someone got to Roberts.

This is so dangerous!”
Possibly.....but more likely SOMEONE HAS SOMETHING on Roberts and/or his family. And, if that’s the case, Roberts will become that SOMEONE’s puppet whenever THEY want to strategically “pull the Roberts string” again...and again....and again.....and again.....and again.....

Roberts, for whatever reason, has sold his soul.

17 posted on 07/09/2012 5:23:53 PM PDT by House Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Until then, he’s just a dic.

18 posted on 07/09/2012 5:25:05 PM PDT by RichInOC (No! BAD Rich! (What'd I say?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freemama
"Someone got to Roberts."

19 posted on 07/09/2012 5:30:10 PM PDT by Flag_This (Real presidents don't bow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; Whenifhow; All

Apparently I had the wrong bill version number, as Whenifhow kindly pointed out.

The correct version, H. R. 4872, does NOT have an Independent Medicare Advisory Board or Independent Cost Advisory Board.

So the unconstitutional horror of a 15 member panel writing laws wholesale does not seem to be in THIS bill, yet.

Since I got confused, you should check the version and bill number, but I think I got it right.

There is a 9 member advisory panel dealing with education, a 15 member Advisory Committee dealing with health workforce statistics, a Health Benefits Advisory Committee (death panel, I think), a TELEHEALTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE, but not the committee in the article.

20 posted on 07/09/2012 7:09:12 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DBrow

is the public law and it DOES have Independent Medicare Advisory Board.

I was wrong about being wrong.

21 posted on 07/09/2012 7:16:24 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DBrow

Thanks for checking and the link.
Do you recall which section you found it?

22 posted on 07/09/2012 7:33:38 PM PDT by Whenifhow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

3403 (p 489) , and 10320, p 949.

I have not read through it yet, I’m working on another project.

23 posted on 07/09/2012 7:51:22 PM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson