It is a tax. The SCOTUS said so
If OmebaCare is not a tax...then it is unConstitutional and Congress should immediately cut all funding and repeal the law.
Do you think Boehner and McConnell will do this?
Romney?
Very good questions that need answers. I am not a Romney supporter but I will likely vote for him if it's a choice between him and Obama. Obama's way too radical. I do wish we had a better choice. Unfortunately the conservative circular firing squad resulted in the wrong man left standing.
Whatever is in it, 51 should be adequate for repeal because they went with a procedure that allowed them to pass it with 51. You can't very well say 51 is adequate for passage but repeal takes 60.
Technically, the 51 really only needs to be 50 + VP.
Perhaps Romney does not want to help conservatives gain control of the Senate. He may feel too pressured as President with a bunch of conservatives in control. If he calls it a tax then that would encourage conservatives to fight hard for a majority big enough to repeal ObamaCare.
Donor assume the spokesman is speaking correctly ...or with authority. If Romney says it himself, there’s a problem. Anything the spokesman says can, and in this case will, be walked back.
The straightforward answer is that you are almost certainly a whining, lying little tool who wants Obama to win the election.
Mittens said if it’s a tax it’s constitutional.
If it’s a penalty it’s unconstitutional.
Stop eating the government run Pablum.
The answer to the posted question is Romney’s spokesman is weak at his job.
He is not a polished community organizer. No one in Mitt’s camp is a community Organizer of Hollywood celeb.
Do you support an alternative to Obama?
Do you really have to ask a question to which the answer is so bloody obvious?
51 can overturn much of Obama-care but not all of it under budget reconciliation. That is how Dems got the House to pass the original Senate Obam-ney-care bill, a second budget reconciliation modification bill that increased both the spending and taxes.
There are so many ironies to ‘this is a tax, not a tax’ argument. Calling it a tax to repeal most of it sides with the SCOTUS (and Roberts) on their decision. Alternatively Romney cant call it a tax because he already is on record saying the mandate in his MA Romney-care bill was not a tax the same as the Obama argument.
It was ruled constitutional by the SCOTUS as a tax and congress can clearly tax us.
|
I can't imagine a worse candidate on the Republican ticket. You have no special knowledge nor unique analysis different than that of the others posters on this site. No one here is a Romney supporter so can that BS. ROMNEY SUCKS AND WILL THINK, SAY AND DO THINGS THAT SUCK. As America politics has become Hell on Earth it is almost certain that in November either Romney or Obama will be our next president. Now, I'm not asking who you will vote for or if you will vote. I'm asking which of the candidates do you prefer is president after the vote in November? A straight forward answer of one word will do. |
(From a reply of 2 days ago):
Only Chief Justice Roberts has flip-flopped on calling this penalty a tax more often than has the Commander-In-Chief, Barack Obama.
For Roberts, it is not a tax for the purposes of ripeness but it is a tax for the purposes of constitutional review. Actually Obama did him one better, telling the world and Congress before passage that it was not a tax, sending His Solicitor General to tell the Supreme Court that it was a tax, and now maintaining once again that is not a tax.
Obviously MSNBC is trying to catch out the Romney campaign in an effort to diffuse a potent issue for the Republicans, the braking by Obama on this promise not to impose any new taxes on the middle class. If the Democrats can now upgrade the idea that Romney himself believes that it is not a tax it will be difficult for the Republicans to exploit the issue.
Unless the Republicans draw clear distinctions they will see a nice issue obfuscated. They should abandon this word game in an attempt to exploit the sophistry of Chief Justice Roberts or they are liable to find themselves flip-flopping as often as Roberts and Obama.
In reality the mandate penalty is just that, a penalty and not a tax, of that I personally have no doubt. Romney is correct in maintaining that it is penalty and it is a position consistent with the universally held belief among conservatives that the law is unconstitutional. Put another way, if one accepts that enforcement of the mandate is by way of a tax and not a penalty, the law is constitutional. Therefore, intellectual consistency requires conservatives to maintain that this is a penalty and not a tax.
But intellectual honesty also requires Democrats to concede that if the law is constitutional the extraction of payment in violation of the mandate is a tax. If it is not a tax, Obama care is not constitutional by the vote of five Justices.
However, Republicans can and should draw a distinction between these sums to be paid by a minority of individuals as a penalty for violating the mandate and the mountain of taxes and debts imposed upon the United States taxpayers by this massive new law. There are several taxes within this bill, such as on medical devices, tanning beds, etc. which are in fact taxes and which do in fact affect the middle class. Moreover, the opposition to the law comes from the fact that its extravagance and mismanagement will simply add trillions to the taxpayer's burdens.
Let the Democrats defend the bill on its extravagance and we will win the day just as we have won the public relations battle on this issue to date.
Roberts' idiotic ruling has NO BEARING on the question. We never needed more than 51 votes.
Roberts' idiotic ruling has NO BEARING on the question. We never needed more than 51 votes.
The way I see it, if it’s not a tax, then the SC just knocked it down. There are no votes needed. It’s unconstitutional as written - period. The SC says that you can’t use the Commerce Clause that way.
I’m wondering if an EO would work at this point, saying that he is upholding the SC’s decision...?
If it’s a tax, we still need to fight it.
If it’s not, then it’s already done and Congress and the President are breaking the law by continuing with the HC’s implementation.
I suspect they want to minimize Obama’s sales pitch; that is good political thinking. It is wise to stop the waves of emotion that drive the liberal voter.
Sadly, I’m seeing more emoting on this forum. Reason suggests only one course of action at present. Focus and get it done.
IT doesn’t matter what Obama, Romney, Reid, Pelosi, or any other politician says now. The Supreme Court ruled it is a tax and that is now the law of the land.