Posted on 03/26/2010 3:44:57 PM PDT by SE Mom
According to a report by Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation, the individual mandate in Obamacare lacks any real enforcement mechanism:
The penalty applies to any period the individual does not maintain minimum essential coverage and is determined monthly. The penalty is assessed through the Code and accounted for as an additional amount of Federal tax owed. However, it is not subject to the enforcement provisions of subtitle F of the Code. The use of liens and seizures otherwise authorized for collection of taxes does not apply to the collection of this penalty. Non-compliance with the personal responsibility requirement to have health coverage is not subject to criminal or civil penalties under the Code and interest does not accrue for failure to pay such assessments in a timely manner.
(h/t to Morgen Richmond at BigGovernment.)
This is probably, to echo the vice-president, a B.F.D. Without effective enforcement of the individual mandate, and with proscriptions against denying coverage on preexisting conditions, you've got yourself the potential for a pretty big moral hazard.
Pass the bill to find out what is in it. Or what ain't.
They’ll fix that loophole retroactively...like everything else....red
Here’s the piece Daniel links to at the Big Government site.
I’m thinking it wasn’t cocaine but CRACK these legislators were smoking when they wrote this damned bill.
Happy Birthday, Ms. Pelosi!
The IRS is the enforcer.
16,500 of them......
Since when did morality matter to a democrat?
It is then up to them to determine if your 'policy' meets minimum standards. (Oh!....almost forgot..your affadavit should only cover the calendar year for the year you are tagged by them.....when they try to fine for X more years, go through the same process for each year...)
per the article Daniel linked to:
~snip~
Because without an effective mechanism of enforcing the individual mandate, the entire system is likely to collapse. (The individual mandate is the “third leg of the stool” as many a liberal has been pointing out for months.) Given that the bill also bans insurance companies from denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, WHY WOULD ANYONE OBTAIN INSURANCE COVERAGE PRIOR TO NEEDING IT? This was already going to be a problem with the relatively low cost of the penalty, but take away any meaningful enforcement of it and it is a complete and total joke.
~snip~
On top of the 104,000 the IRS already employs.
The presumption here is that the rule of law still means something in America. Those who still believe so are in for a very rude awakening.
It's a stool, alright. A big, nasty, smelly, heaping stool.
Am I missing something? If the mandate is fake, the insurance industry will collapse under the weight of people signing up after they acquire pre-existing conditions.
So instead of a mandate, the provision is essentially a smokescreen for inevitable single-payer. Which is worse than a mandate, IMO.
See post # 8...” the entire system is likely to collapse....
The title of this article is confusing when viewed in relation to its actual content....
“...the insurance industry will collapse under the weight...”
-
And THAT, my FRiend, is the plan.
If they attempt to fix all of the problems - pre-existing conditions, up to age 26, and now this enforcement - all they do is open the wound again for the people. That is not going to be good for the Dems.
Add on to that, if the enforcement fix is made - and it comes to light that the IRS is the enforcement arm - then that is not going to be good for the Dems either.
Popcorn please ... this is not over it appears.
No wonder Weiner had a big grin when he was on with O’Reilly the other night.
If this was ruse to destroy the system, there will be hell to pay, I am afraid.
Yup!
That won’t work unless you never see a doctor.
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.