.
Posted on 06/30/2012 11:32:11 AM PDT by ColdOne
"It's a penalty because you have a choice," Carney said. "You don't have a choice to pay your taxes, right? You have a choice to buy -- if you can afford health insurance. … So if you don't buy it, and you can afford it, it is an irresponsible thing to do to ask the rest of America's taxpayers to pay for your care when you go to the emergency room. So your choice is to purchase healthcare reform or a penalty will be administered."
(Excerpt) Read more at upi.com ...
Sorry, Carney.
You’re not on the Supreme Court of the United States.
The Supreme Court of the United States of America has ruled:
IT’S A F*ING TAX, YOU F*ING BOZO!!!!
So what about those (like Rush) who would CHOOSE to self-insure? That is to pay their bills as they are incurred. Tell me again why they need to be punished, Bozo????
.
The rest of the country does not pay for your visit to the emergency room if you can afford to pay. If you can afford to pay, you pay for your own emergency room visits.
There just ignoring the parts of the ruling they don’t like.
When are we just going to ignore them? Just ignore their laws! They ignore what they want to ignore, so should we.
There is no constitution. Let’s just start advocating for legislation that directly affects Joe-Six pack liberal. Make them buy a gun; fine them if they have an abortion; life in prison for weed possession. To hell with them!
The White House is correct: It’s a punishment for disobedience. Let that sink in for a moment.
The political problem for the White House is that as of last Thursday, the penalty is legally a tax.
The much bigger problem for Americans is that as of last Thursday, Congress can now punish them for disobedience for any act or even any failure to act, either by imposing a tax on doing whatever Congress does not want done, or by imposing a tax on not doing whatever Congress does want you to do.
To be more specific, the problems with the Roberts opinion are the following:
1) Congress didn’t think it was enacting either a tax OR a tax credit. They didn’t frame it or structure it that way. That’s why they didn’t ensure that the bill originated in the House, as the Constitution requires of any bill that raises revenue. That issue will almost certainly be litigated, now. No one bothered before, because no one thought it was a tax.
2) Had Congress intended to use a tax credit to achieve its ends, it would have had to provide a payment to everyone who both qualified for and claimed the credit. So it would have had to either increase taxes or reduce other spending in order to be revenue neutral, or borrow more money otherwise. All of those choices would have had political consequences that could well have prevented the bill from ever passing. And the “tax” is not a credit, not even per the Court. You can’t apply for it and get money back.
3) Per the Court, the penalty is an excise tax. The Constitution grants Congress the power to lay and collect duties, imposts and excises, with the only limitation being that all such must be uniform throughout the United States. The Supreme Court previously also imposed the limitation that the rate of the tax cannot be so high as to be clearly nothing but “punitive.” Note, however, that the Court won’t save you from taxes meant as punishment for disobedience, provided the rate isn’t “too high” (which isn’t defined.)
But an excise tax, by definition up until Thursday, is a tax on an event. Now it’s also a tax on an event that didn’t occur, thanks to Chief Justice Roberts. Semantically, that’s a fine imposed by the legislature directly on those who must pay it, without those who are required to pay it having first committed a crime defined by law as such, and then being convicted of that crime by a court, and then being sentenced by the court to paying some fine that the law allows.
There’s a term for laws that impose penalties that way, without due process of law, where the one to be punished can not defend himself in court, and can not argue that it’s Unconstitutional to punish him for the particular actions for which he is being civilly sued or criminally charged. Such laws are called bills of attainder.
Idiot! The hospital goes after >you< via a collection agency. They don’t send your bill to your neighbor. Where did this moron come from?
It is whatever they tell you it is, and there isn’t a damn thing anyone can do about it.
Can't have it both ways here, Jake.
It is a penalty! Of that there is no question. Then why did Roberts say it was a tax so he could pass on Obamacare? Simple! Because he wanted to shore up Obamacare and that lie was the only way he could justify it. Roberts is the biggest clown I have ever seen in my life.
From a Politico article, September 2009:
In the most contentious exchange of President Barack Obama’s marathon of five Sunday shows, he said it is “not true” that a requirement for individuals to get health insurance under a key reform plan now being debated amounts to a tax increase.
But he could look it up — in the bill.
Page 29, sentence one of the bill introduced by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont) says: “The consequence for not maintaining insurance would be an excise tax.”
And the rest of the bill is clear that the Finance Committee does, in fact, consider it a tax: “The excise tax would be assessed through the tax code and applied as an additional amount of Federal tax owed.”
The highest law of the land says it’s a tax.
I’d like to meet Carney sometime and demonstrate the true meaning of “PENALTY”; Afterwards, he would be singing a different song - in a much higher octave!
Their whole flaw lies in the fact that they assume that if you are working and above the poverty-level, that you can afford their one-size-fits-all insurance! I work 2 jobs to pay a mortgage and put food on the table, and I do not qualify for a subsidy and I don’t have $550/month (the projected premium price) extra lying around to buy insurance. I will pay the tax-penalty instead and go without. I also would not buy their insurance on religious grounds, as Sibelius has mandated a $1 abortion surcharge on every monthly premium paid. So, I either sell my house or my soul. No thanks.
Come November we need to take this ruling, and stick it up Roberts’ backside, and send Carney up there after it.
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.