House to prohibit IRS from implementing healthcare law (Just don't fund it)

The Hill ^ | 7/2/2012 | Pete Kasperowicz

[tobyhill]

I agree that it won’t be repealed through legislation but being a law enforcable by the IRS there are 2 immediate options at least the House has, don’t fund any part of it or attach a tax reduction bill to the HHS and IRS funding and lower the taxes to near zero. Let Obama, if he’s reelected, veto HHS and IRS funding because of a tax reduction in their funding.

[dps.inspect]

Ok, let me make the record straight... I am voting for Romney this time, cause there is no other choice and no time to ramp up interest or enthusiasm for any other third tier candidate. The next four years will provide time and interest for a Tea Party Candidate which I will be enthusiastically working toward... to allow Obama a second term, no matter what your thoughts toward Romney are, is simply inexcusable.

[NoLibZone]

Each American now personally funds abortion and the 4th of July.

The American Enigma.

[Defiant]

I'm just saying that won't work because of judicial fiat. If a law says we have to pay someone something, and another law doesn't fund the department responsible for paying it, the person owed can sue and get their money. Our judiciary would probably order the government to fund Obamacare, even if Congress denies the funds.

Remember, this is a federal judiciary that ordered Kansas City to impose taxes on its citizens to fund a busing scheme for region-wide integration. When they order the government to provide free health care to illegals, or free lawyers to criminals, how do you think that gets paid for? A judge will order it to be paid whether the legislature funds it or not. That is another aspect of the problem, and we will need to address this kind of judical tyranny, but first, we just need to repeal Obamacare.