To: philman_36
Please do actually read what I wrote.
He does not say it's an income tax directly. He suggests it's an income tax by saying people with a certain income have to pay it if they don't buy Healthcare. But he doesn't ever actually say what kind of tax it is: only that it's "permitted."
Read the dissent.
Neither you, nor Roberts, nor this blog-pimp have any leg to stand on.
84 posted on
07/01/2012 10:30:25 AM PDT by
FredZarguna
(When you find yourself arguing against Scalia and Thomas, you AREN'T a conservative.)
To: FredZarguna
Please do actually read what I wrote.I did. I even posted what you wrote and you basically wrote that you didn't know what kind of tax it was because Roberts didn't say what kind of tax it was when he actually did.
He does not say it's an income tax directly. He suggests it's an income tax by saying people with a certain income have to pay it if they don't buy Healthcare.
Good Lord, man, can't you read?! He upheld the Governments contention that it was a tax!
Congress thought it could enact such a command under the Commerce Clause, and the Government primarily defended the law on that basis. But, for the reasons explained above, the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power. Under our precedent, it is therefore necessary to ask whether the Governments alternative reading of the statutethat it only imposes a tax on those without insuranceis a reasonable one. Snip...
The Government asks us to interpret the mandate as imposing a tax, if it would otherwise violate the Constitution. Granting the Act the full measure of deference owed to federal statutes, it can be so read, for the reasons set forth below.
But he doesn't ever actually say what kind of tax it is: only that it's "permitted."
The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part and unconstitutional in part. The individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congresss power under the Commerce Clause. That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage in it. In this case, however, it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congresss power to tax.
Sounds like he's directly calling it an income tax to me.
87 posted on
07/01/2012 10:42:21 AM PDT by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson