Cartel in Plain Sight: How the CCE’s Own Presentation to the FCLB Confirms Monopoly Tactics in Chiropractic Regulation
Originally published: 2025-07-21
Introduction: A Presentation Meant to Impress—But It Reveals Much More
At the 90th Annual Educational Congress of the Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards (FCLB), the Council on Chiropractic Education (CCE) delivered a presentation meant to showcase its legitimacy and leadership in chiropractic education. But a closer look reveals something more disturbing: a self-incriminating document that exposes the machinery of the chiropractic cartel.
Rather than affirming transparency and accountability, the presentation confirms what critics have long argued, that the CCE, in concert with the NBCE and FCLB, operates as a tightly knit monopoly that manipulates accreditation and licensure to consolidate control and suppress dissent.
Accreditation or Gatekeeping? The True Role of the CCE
The CCE presentation repeatedly emphasizes its role in “promoting excellence” and “assuring quality” through accreditation. But behind these platitudes lies a more troubling reality.
“Accreditation cannot define the perfect direction of the profession, nor can accreditation hold back the profession’s growth.” —CCE Presentation
In practice, the CCE has done exactly that: defining what chiropractic must be (and must not be), while holding back philosophically diverse programs. The CCE’s own documents show how it uses subjective interpretations of “competency” and “safety” to enforce conformity to a narrow scope of practice.
Tying Accreditation to Testing: The Heart of the Cartel
The presentation brags about high board scores, licensing success, and alignment with regulatory bodies. But what it fails to acknowledge is how these metrics are now artificially propped up by Policy 56, which ties accreditation to taking and passing NBCE exams, particularly Part IV.
This creates a circular monopoly:
To graduate, students must take NBCE exams.
To be licensed, graduates need to come from CCE-accredited schools.
The CCE uses NBCE scores to justify its accreditation decisions.
Who polices the NBCE?
“Student success outcomes: Board scores and licensing success.” —CCE Presentation
This isn’t quality assurance, it’s forced compliance, and it's a textbook example of restraint of trade.
“Transparency” or Narrative Control?
The CCE claims to align with the U.S. Department of Education’s transparency agenda. But real transparency requires open meetings, publicly accessible policies, and meaningful stakeholder input, none of which the CCE consistently provides.
“Greater transparency... clarity for all stakeholders.” —CCE Slide 21
The truth is, the CCE operates in secrecy, limits recording of its meetings, and makes policy decisions in closed-door sessions. These actions violate the spirit and potentially the letter of federal recognition criteria under 34 CFR §602.23.
Fairness and Consistency—or Just More Control?
In a bizarre attempt to demonstrate fairness, the CCE included a “Dressgate” meme in its presentation, comparing interpretive differences among site teams to the viral debate over a blue or gold dress. This flippant analogy trivializes a deeply political and uneven process that has targeted dissenting programs and favored politically aligned institutions.
“How does CCE focus on fairness and consistency? Training, training, training...” —CCE Slide 30
But training cannot fix a system designed to suppress deviation from an approved ideological path. The call for fairness rings hollow when schools are punished not for failing students, but for refusing to conform.
Outcome Metrics: A Mask for Monopolistic Metrics
Slides on student outcomes and institutional reporting reveal another layer of deception. The CCE and NBCE collaborate to force outcomes that can then be used as propaganda: graduation rates, board passage, licensure.
“Accreditors may develop tiers... denoting institutions as higher or lower performing.” —CCE Slide 24
Yet those outcomes are predetermined by a closed system that bars alternatives. Schools that reject the NBCE testing monopoly risk losing accreditation, not because of educational quality, but because of cartel enforcement.
Cartel Cohesion: Presenting to Their Own Enforcers
Let’s not forget the context: this presentation was delivered to the FCLB, an organization that houses many of the same regulators who sit on CCE and/or NBCE boards, now or in the past. This incestuous relationship is the hallmark of regulatory capture, not legitimate oversight.
“Leadership so the public, our government, and our profession value chiropractic education.” —CCE Vision Statement
This isn’t leadership. It’s a carefully choreographed performance to maintain power and eliminate opposition.
A Confession Disguised as a Presentation
The CCE’s presentation to the FCLB doesn’t refute the claims of cartel behavior, it confirms them. It reveals a system obsessed with control, allergic to transparency, and willing to weaponize accreditation to maintain its monopoly.
This document should be viewed not as a sign of strength, but as a declaration of how entrenched and coordinated the cartel truly is. And for those fighting for reform, it provides the evidence needed to press forward with regulatory, legal, and legislative challenges.
Call to Action
If you're a chiropractor, student, legislator, or educator concerned about the future of chiropractic—now is the time to act. Demand transparency. Challenge Policy 56. Support alternative accreditation and licensure pathways. The cartel can only survive in the shadows. Let’s bring it into the light.
“Accreditation & Regulation are NOT identical... Rules for higher quality by far less clear.” —CCE Slide 6
Exactly. And that vagueness is the weapon.
