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 ...
How can it not be a tax when it says right there in the text that it's an excise tax?
I don’t believe the “Evil Genius” stuff for Roberts any more than I believe the “Magnificent Bustard” crap about Rove. The ruling was idiocy. One would be hard pressed to find a dissent by the losing FOUR, that pretty much states “The WHOLE law was Constitutional BULLSHIT and no further discussion is needed.”
Roberts F@cked up and betrayed this country - there are no “ifs”, “ands” or “buts” about it. It was a travesty against freedom.
Sort of like light being a wave or a particle, depending on how you look at it.
I was never very good at understanding that one either.
"It's a penalty because you have a choice"
You are citing the wrong part of the Act.
The individual mandate everyone is arguing about and which Roberts ruled is a tax is in §5000A.
You cited what people call the “cadillac” tax in §49801, which is not the individual mandate but a different provision entirely.
But don’t feel bad, Congress didn’t understand the Act and they actually voted on it!
Sorry, no. No bill that imposed any tax originated in the House that subsequently became ObamaCare. The Senate adding such a tax later does not satisfy the Constitutional requirement, unless the funds collected by the tax are allocated by the law to a particular purpose or program. Such is not the case with respect to the mandate penalty, because Congress didn’t think it was a tax.
You are just wrong about this.
The bill the Senate passed started life as H.R. 3590 and was first introduced in the House.
That bill was then amended to insert ObamaCare.
You may not like the way that was done, but them's the facts.
Call it what you will.
At its heart it is just another money pump for wealth redistribution to Obama’s favored supporters and professional victim groups.
The same people who are now sucking a free ride off Uncle Sam’s teat will still be sucking a free ride when the penalty/tax kicks in.
The bill as passed by the House had no tax. End of discussion. Cite the case law the proves otherwise.
ObamaCare was a bill originally passed by the House. It was called "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act" and was subsequently amended by the Senate to replace that text with the text of ObamaCare. The Dems knew exactly what they were doing and got away with it.
“The bill as passed by the House had no tax. End of discussion. Cite the case law the proves otherwise.”
End of discussion? What a joke.
The House bill dealt directly with amending the Internal Revenue Code. There was even a section “raising revenue” by increasing certain fees under the code.
Look if you are going to be so categorical and insistent about something how about at least do your homework.
It started in the house... The senate used a bill passed by the house. They stripped the original text of the house bill out and stuffed in Obamacare.
bad analogy..
yes.. You can speed and get a ticket.
You can also chose not to drive and thus not get a ticket. Nor be forced to by insurance for a car you do not own.
You can not live with out being affected by this tax/fee/fine/penalty.
Youtube vid here.
It is a TAX...I could call it an orange tree...but it is STILL a TAX...
Carney is right. It’s not written as a tax.
So now that the Court has ruled it is a tax, even if it wasn't written as a tax, as you claim, isn't Carney actually disagreeing with the Court's decision instead of agreeing and supporting it?
For the Act to have been Constitutional doesn't it have to be considered a tax even though the word "penalty" is used instead of "tax"? Isn't that what the Court said?
Wasn't the use of 'penalty' really nothing more than 'word play' by those who wrote the bill so that it wouldn't be seen as the tax it really is?
And if it isn't a tax then why is the IRS in charge of collecting this "penalty"? Aren't they the revenue service of the government? Wouldn't such action be outside of their scope of operation?
It’s tyranny.
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.
