Posted on 06/28/2012 8:45:02 AM PDT by Starman417
Remember this video? Obama telling us all that ObamaCare is NOT a tax. But according to the deciding vote in the Supreme Court decision today, it IS a tax and the act is upheld.
Chief Justice Roberts opinion is that the mandate violates the Commerce Clause but since he believes it is a tax, and that it was within Congresses power to tax, the violation of the Commerce Clause doesn't matter.
Welcome to Canada folks, and the ever increasing tax rates.
If Congress can reach out and command even those furthest removed from an interstate market to participate in the market, then the Commerce Clause becomes a font of unlimited power, or in Hamilton’s words, “the hideous monster whose devouring jaws . . . spare neither sex nor age, nor high nor low, nor sacred nor profane.” The Federalist No. 33, p. 202 (C. Rossiter ed. 1961).
Barack Obama and the Democrats now own the LARGEST MIDDLE-CLASS TAX INCREASE IN HISTORY!
Don't forget these words. They OWN it now.
Some liberal court watcher's are urging caution:
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...
This could be the beginning of the end for Obama. The “sleeping giant” has been awakened. If the GOP plays it correctly, there will be a clean sweep in November...The White House, the Senate and the House.
Guest Post: Americans Are Being Prepared For Full Spectrum Tyranny
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/guest-post-americans-are-being-prepared-full-spectrum-tyranny
40 hour work weeks will be history.
29 hours per week max.
Thank you very much.
Americans income will be reduced by 28% not to mention higher taxes taking a further bite.
I maybe pollyannish in saying this, but John Roberts may have handed conservatives a great victory by calling Obamacare a tax.
This will now play out in the electorate as the largest tax increase ever.
Hate to say I told you so..
Just like many are getting too confident of an Obama loss in Nov- not a good idea.
We’ll be lucky if we EVER get rid of the Marxist/Muslim usurper.
From the opinion:
“Our permissive reading of these powers is explained inpart by a general reticence to invalidate the acts of the Nation’s elected leaders. “Proper respect for a co-ordinate branch of the government” requires that we strike down an Act of Congress only if “the lack of constitutional authority to pass [the] act in question is clearly demonstrated.” United States v. Harris, 106 U. S. 629, 635 (1883).Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.
Our deference in matters of policy cannot, however,become abdication in matters of law. “The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 176 (1803). Our respect for Congress’s policy judgments thus can never extend so far as to disavow restraints on federal power that the Constitution carefully constructed. “The peculiar circumstances of the moment may render a measure more or less wise, but cannot render it more or less constitutional.” Chief Justice John Marshall, A Friend of the Constitution No. V, Alexandria Gazette, July5, 1819, in John Marshall’s Defense of McCulloch v. Maryland 190–191 (G. Gunther ed. 1969).
Or as the dissent starts out: “Congress has set out to remedy the problem that the best health care is beyond the reach of many Americans who cannot afford it. It can assuredly do that, by exercising the powers accorded to it under the Constitution.”
There is not a hair breathes of difference.
The justices recognize the federal government is one of limited delegated powers according to all the opinions filed in this case. They all then go on to set that aside and abrogate its owns duty to find that there really are no limits except as to what you might label a specific term or provision = clear up that nasty language and we say okay.
So does this in fact constitute the first Fed tax on the 50% of the population that currently pays no fed income tax? If so... this is huge.
Obama just won the 2012 second term to the WH. RIP America - there is no way you can spin this in any other way.
Talk about a shot in the arm for the TEA Party!
That is where the focus needs to be.
A TEA Party Fourth of July.
SC found it to be a tax.
OK...
.
my opinion and I will stick to it.
Look for a 20% (minimum) loss (2,500 or more points) over the next 30 days!
Romney has raked in OVER $2M bucks since the announcement this morning.
Exactly. What they also failed to clear up is the ability to tax vs. Rights. IE: Religious objections to birth control/abortion that will be funded by this mandate/tax.
Owning guns ‘cause injuries’ = tax. Is that not an infringement (yeah, I know, licenses are as well; but I digress).
Course, there’s crickets from the House even still.
Brutus, among others, saw to clearly that the powers proposed for a central government meant perforce that the rights of independent states and individuals would gradually be eroded over time to leave a sole all powerful central government.
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.