This is extremely dangerous ground, and a large number of Republicans voted for it.
85 Republicans voted in favor and 87 voted against. Not much “whipping” going on from the House minority whip.
It's called Bill of attainder(sp) and is unconstitutional....Congresscritters can't 'go after' individuals or small groups of people. Of course with a populist congress, a populist whitehouse, and a populist Justice Branch, all rich people (people who make more than 12,000/yr) should simply hang themselves with piano wire (Barney Frank thinks so after being appraised by AIG CEO Lilly of the effect this strawman was having on his employees). This was simply a class envy strawman that the kabuki federal gov't is throwing up as a trial balloon before electing themselves to lifetime positions. looks like it's succeeding.
The central question in this case, like that in Kurth Ranch, is whether the tax in question is, despite its label, a criminal penalty.4 A "tax" can encompass any "pecuniary burden laid upon individuals or property for the purpose of supporting the government." New Jersey v. Anderson, 203 U.S. 483, 492 (1906). The North Carolina Drug Tax, as a pecuniary burden laid upon drug dealers, is in that sense a tax. But the question here is whether the tax is so punitive that the constitutional protections afforded to criminal defendants should attach to its enforcement. "`[T]here comes a time in the extension of the penalizing features of the so-called tax when it loses its character as such and becomes a mere penalty with the characteristics of regulation and punishment.'" Kurth Ranch, 511 U.S. at 779 (quoting A. Magnano Co. v. Hamilton, 292 U.S. 40, 46 (1934)). A penalty "may be termed a duty or tax and yet be a penalty. Its name does not determine its nature."5 Fontenot v. Accardo, 278 F. 871, 874 (5th Cir.1922). As we explain below, North Carolina's Drug Tax, like Montana's Dangerous Drug Tax, has enough punitive features that its nature is that of a criminal penalty, not a civil tax.
Lynn v. West 134 F.3rd 583 (4th Cir., 1998)
If it's designed as a penalty and not for raising revenue, it's a penalty, no matter what the government calls it. If it's a penalty, then those being penalized are entitled to due process.
Congress has turned into a mob, more like a pack of wild mongrel dogs attacking everything in their path. Nobody is safe...nobody. But there are many who think they are part of the pack...and they aren’t.
This is unconstitutional in every way I can think of. More, it is purely deceitful...They, congress and ZERO signed this into law and now they are making it the fault of someone else. Self righteous indignation is all this amounts to.
This is another dose of TERRIBLE news for the Dying AMERICA.
Our Constitution has been trampled just as though congress and ZERO went to the National Archive, tore it from the vault and burned it on the National Mall.
I am sick to my stomach.
Maybe I’m wrong, but doesn’t the legal concept of keeping to a contract pre-date even something as old and established as habeus corpus?
Damn right it's wrong. It's called a Bill of Attainder with the punishment set as punative taxation.
The 10th Amendment resolutions are nice, but nothing will get better until the states take a stand against this nonsense.
Who is next in the Gestapo of our time?
Is there a list of the Republicans who voted for this bill? I want to see if my congressman understands the constitution or not.
This will be tied up in court for years to come and will end up costing the tax payers many times over the cost of those bonuses.
I am waiting to see a list of Republicans who voted for this.
Your position is correct. As much as I find the AIG bonuses to be extremely distasteful, passing a law that essentially imposes a retroactive tax is extremely dangerous as it establishes a precedent that could be followed in the future to increase government revenues.
How would people feel if this law were one day cited to levy a tax on their lawfully gain incomes from some past period?
You can bet they will be hiring some real clever tax lawyers when they do their taxes next year.
I am very against the bailout, but this is absolutely chilling!
Obama knew these bonuses were being given and now he needs to explain why he's throwing his supporters under the bus.
Express your outrage at Conservative’s rising star, Eric Cantor who vote for this piece of crap. He’s out there blaming AIG for this mess. He needs to figure out the Democrats created this debacle.
Guess no ex post facto laws in the constitution is now to be ignored.
Libtards have no guts to own up to failure, and no respect for the Constitution.
I told them she's toast, politically, as far as I'm concerned. No more money to her campaign, or to the County, State, or National Republican Committees of any stripe. No more support, and I will attend every one of her local meetings that I can and pin her down on these actions.
Next step: fax to her WA DC office (Phone: 202-225-2006 Fax: 202-225-3392) on this.
Good source for tracking this stuff: The House Clerk's website (http://clerk.house.gov/legislative/legvotes.html)