Completely Beyond Congress' Reach
By debrakcarey
@debrakcarey (19887)
United States
June 15, 2012 4:38pm CST
This report from Cato Institute scares me a bit. Even if the Supreme Court overturns Obamacare, not all of it will disappear. Read this and see if you can make sense of it:
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/cato-study-heretofore-unreported-obamacare-bug-puts-ipab-completely-beyond-congress-reach/
[i]Today, the Cato Institute releases a new study by Diane Cohen and me titled, “The Independent Payment Advisory Board: PPACA’s Anti-Constitutional and Authoritarian Super-Legislature.” Cohen is a senior attorney at the Goldwater Institute and lead counsel in the C00ns v. Geithner lawsuit challenging IPAB and other aspects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, a.k.a. ObamaCare.
From the executive summary:
When the unelected government officials on this board submit a legislative proposal to Congress, it automatically becomes law: PPACA requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to implement it. Blocking an IPAB “proposal” requires at a minimum that the House and the Senate and the president agree on a substitute. The Board’s edicts therefore can become law without congressional action, congressional approval, meaningful congressional oversight, or being subject to a presidential veto. Citizens will have no power to challenge IPAB’s edicts in court.
Worse, PPACA forbids Congress from repealing IPAB outside of a seven-month window in the year 2017, and even then requires a three-fifths majority in both chambers…[/i]
So Pelosi meant it when she said we have to pass it to know what is in it?
Under the statute as written, if Congress fails to repeal IPAB in 2017, then as of 2020 Congress will have absolutely zero ability to block or amend the laws that IPAB writes, and zero power to affect the Secretary’s implementation of those laws. IPAB will become a permanent super-legislature, with the Secretary as its executive. And if the president fails to appoint any IPAB members, the Secretary will unilaterally wield all of IPAB’s legislative and executive powers, including the power to appropriate funds for her own department. It’s completely nutty, yet completely consistent with the desire of ObamaCare’s authors to protect IPAB from congressional interference.
1/6th of our economy in the government's hands? And bureaucrats in charge of our healthcare? If we do not elect a Republican president and Congress we might as well just move to Sibera? I mean, we are now ruled by executive order anyway?
1 person likes this
4 responses
@mickeyb123 (117)
• United States
15 Jun 12
And to think that we got this guy in the White House because there were enough people who did not want to be considered racist?!
We really need to find enough people that do not want to be considered stupid in November.
That is if Barack Milhouse Obama doesn't just go ahead and institute marshal law just before the election so there will not be one. He has been setting the stage for quite a while now.
1 person likes this
@mickeyb123 (117)
• United States
15 Jun 12
Oh, and Debra, by the way?
It is not going to help just to get a bunch of Republi9cans in there, we HAVE to get Conservatives in there!
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
17 Jun 12
Don't be too scared, Deb! Since the Supreme Court that gave us Citizens United is expected to rule this month on the Affordable Care Act there is a lot of time between now and 2017 for Congress to TRY to repeal it if it's upheld; however, that won't be easy since they'll need the 2/3 majority and a President willing to sign it. I HOPE they can get neither.
I'm afraid I don't have too much faith in a study by the Koch Brothers' Cato Institute since they're very much opposed to any government interference or assistance regarding health care, therefore likely to come up with something to scare those who share their opinion. Anyway, 1/6 of our economy isn't going to be in the government's hands, most of it will still be where it's been for decades...the hands of big insurance. I'm STILL praying for a single-payer plan!
Annie
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
18 Jun 12
And how are the Koch Bros. any more dangerous than Geo. Soros? The left is certainly enriched by HIS dollars.
You want me and others to trust the media HE pays very large and liberal amounts to. He is responsible for:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=589
And I cannot understand how the human race survived for all those ages without the government taking care of them.
Missed things while myLot was down.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
18 Jun 12
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/beck-tv-how-much-does-george-soros-control/
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
19 Jun 12
I had a similar thought. I was trying to respond to you as a matter of fact.
and I thought, oh my...I've gone and gotten myself kicked off the site. 
So, you're ok with the Unions taking dues from all the members (some of whom are Republicans, or at least NOT Democrats) and giving it to progressive campaigns?
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
Since the mid-1980s in particular, he (George Soros) has used his immense influence to help reconfigure the political landscapes of several countries around the world—in some cases playing a key role in toppling regimes that had held the reins of government for years, even decades. Vis à vis the United States, a strong case can be made for the claim that Soros today affects American politics and culture more profoundly that any other living person.
Here's an interesting article on what HE has said of himself;
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=977
and it is not even written by Glenn Beck. 
So, you're ok with the Unions taking dues from all the members (some of whom are Republicans, or at least NOT Democrats) and giving it to progressive campaigns?
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
Since the mid-1980s in particular, he (George Soros) has used his immense influence to help reconfigure the political landscapes of several countries around the world—in some cases playing a key role in toppling regimes that had held the reins of government for years, even decades. Vis à vis the United States, a strong case can be made for the claim that Soros today affects American politics and culture more profoundly that any other living person.
Here's an interesting article on what HE has said of himself;
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=977
and it is not even written by Glenn Beck. 1 person likes this
@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
20 Jun 12
We're seeing more and more of this.. we fight against one thing, just to hear of another.. it doesn't ever end or slow down..
"When the unelected government officials on this board submit a legislative proposal to Congress, it automatically becomes law" - this, is such a horrible precedent!!! and so few even realize it's going on!!
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
21 Jun 12
We've allowed it in bureaucracies such as the EPA, IRS, NEA, and so on. Some are not even worried about this, they accept it as normal! Americans better wake up and realize that they are trading away their freedom for security or there will be none left for their children or grand children.
@dragon54u (31634)
• United States
16 Jun 12
What struck me when I read your link and comments is that this effectively takes over the government without the consent of the people and that is treason. Why is this president not being impeached and thrown out of office?! This is really no different from forming an army and forcibly taking over, it's just a bit more sneaky.
He's been ruling by executive order for some time now. Firing GM executives, telling banks what to do, ordering the stop to deportation of certain illegal aliens...and nobody has stopped him. I agree with Mickey and I've been saying and thinking it for about a year--I think Mr. Obama is stirring things up so that by the time the election rolls around he will declare martial law and suspend elections. It's the only way he can keep this PPACA intact and unimpeded without all-out aggression.
This is it--get him out or live in a dictatorship. I don't think I'm overreacting.
