Posted on 06/29/2012 2:53:03 PM PDT by sourcery
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act did not originate in the House. The bill that did originate in the House, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, did not contain any mandate fining (or "taxing," as the will now refer to it in Washington,) for failure to have health insurance.
That was Constitutionally acceptable during the period when fines for what someone has not done were still fines, and had not been converted into taxes by having the Supreme Court amend the Constitution sua sponte.
But as a tax, the mandate converts the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act into a bill that raises revenue.
Article I, Section 7: All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives
That makes Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Unconstitutional, because it's a bill that raises revenue that did not originate in the House.
Klayman To Seek Indictment Of Justices Roberts and Kagan Before Citizens Grand Jury
You had inquired of the possibility of a lawsuit, and I replied suggesting the possibility of Horowitz or Judicial watch...
Who collects the "penalty" for no policy?
What about the "germaneness" of the amendment to the intent of the original bill. Isn't that a rule?
The IRS
The money goes to insurance companies<<
_____________________________________________________
Who collects the "penalty" for no policy?
The IRS
_____________________________________________________
IT'S A TAX
Thank you.
First, I tried doing my own research on this, and Google FAILed. So, I broadened my search and found the research had already been done.
When I first learned of the shell bill trick WRT ObamaCare back in 2009, I yelled at Reid through my computer screen. Didn’t work.
Out of curiosity, when you broadened your search, where did you go beyond Google? Did you use proprietary databases, or something available to the public?
IIRC, I just changed the search terms. I don’t recall the details. I’m not an accomplished searcher, but more like the blind squirrel. LOL.
The problem finding the info on this apparently stems from the fact that the original House bill was changed by replacing the text with the ObamaCare text. The original bill text is difficult to find, and that makes it seem like it was always the ObamaCare bill. Imagine that.
BTW, at least for now, I’ve decided to pay the tax rather than buy ObamaCare insurance.
Oh, and Harry Reid never changes his underwear.
ah, i see.
Bottom line the 0 group uses fraud and deception to get what ever they want ala Alinsky IMO Roberts called them on it. Let’s see how it plays out.
Sis, BIL and their six kids and family all think his ruling is a blessing. They are in Michigan and folks are riled up! Yard sign are already going up in lawns were they have been empty in the past. Debbie Spend-it-Now is going down for one.
As I posted yesterday, there was consternation on Thursday at my Kiwanis breakfast meeting when the decision was announced. Few, if any, wanted or expected this legislation to be upheld. What you mention is uplifting. It’s up to us now to drive repeal through to fruition. Let’s get it done.
It’s a trap, trying to apply logic to a decision which “transcends” logic.
If the IRS collects it...it’s a tax.
It’s called the “shell bill scam”
The bill that passed the Senate wasn’t technically a Senate bill. Reid took a bill that had already passed the House, stripped out the provisions to turn it into a “shell bill,” and then inserted the text of ObamaCare to get around this requirement. The bill that passed the Senate was H.R.3590, which initially had to do with tax breaks for military homeowners.
H.RES.1203
Latest Title: Providing for consideration of the Senate amendments to the bill (H.R. 3590) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, and for other purposes, and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4872) to provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 202 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2010.
Sponsor: Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28] (introduced 3/20/2010) Cosponsors (None)
Related Bills: H.R.3590, H.R.4872
Latest Major Action: 3/21/2010 Passed/agreed to in House. Status: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 224 - 206 (Roll no. 163).
Latest Action: 3/21/2010 Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
House Reports: 111-448
It’s the old bait-and-switch fraud being used by the congresscritters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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.