Skip to comments.Pam Bondi must sue again over Obamacare: SCOTUS rejected punishment tax!
Posted on 06/30/2012 2:50:44 PM PDT by JOHN W K
click here to read article
Regardless of penalties or apportionment, the SC has approved taxation as a means of sustaining Obamacare, that's all the room needed to weasel the application.
No one should expect that the majority of those who refuse to buy insurance, and are not covered by the hand full of employers who will continue to provide it, are outside of the 47% who pays no tax today.
(After all, that's a huge percentage of the dem's voter base...frequently more than once per election.)
The same income exemptions that leave them paying nothing and/or collecting a rebate for money they didn't pay into the system will assure that no government will actually charge them a tax for not being insured. The fed's already define them as exempt from taxes!
For now Obamacare is a reality, and it can be supported by new taxes; unless it's repealed, those taxes are going to be redirected to apply to you and me, the non-rich, not overly poor, taxpaying and insurance buying, middle class.
(Sorry, but it's only a mini-rant.)
So is this a two part quiz?...
In that, once ALL the SCOTUS agrees it is a tax..
You then can challenge if it is a LEGAL tax under the powers granted under the Constitution?
Did this box it the courts left being able to save Obama care if it is challenge as a LEGAL tax in a 2nt round?
...Remember a tax can not be challenge till it is first levied...is this rulings a poison pill for months from now after the election?
John, this a masterful dissection of CJ Roberts’ disastrous and insane ruling. Thank you for posting it. It clearly shows Roberts either misread or ignored the Constitution when rendering his majority opinion.
As was suggested upthread, please consider routing this write-up to Pam Bondi with all due haste. This is the Roberts Rule Killer.
Office of Attorney General
State of Florida
The Capitol PL-01
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050
http://myfloridalegal.com/contact.nsf/contact?Open&Section=Attorney_General for email
I think Pam needs all the encouragement we can give her!
It should be attacked and litigated against from every conceivable position until it has a stake through its heart and Roberts is publicly shown to be a fool.
The thirteenth amendment should also be raised, as we are now coerced to work to pay a tax or be forced to work to pay for insurance. Unlike income tax where we are taxed on the fruits of our labor and investments, we are now able to be taxed for not laboring (minimum income notwithstanding)
Roberts has enslaved all of America...and killed John Galt
While I found Cain’s 999 appealing, there is a roadblock in that sales tax is not really constitutional, and would require a constitutional amendment. As should Obama care
I see our so-call conservative talking heads on TV working their magic to befuddle and confuse the people, pretending that the Roberts’ opinion sets a "minefield" for our Washington Establishment pinko crowd.
Make no mistake! If the Roberts’ ruling is not appealed, and the assumed mandate’s taxing power exercised under the ruling is not questioned as being unconstitutional and overturned, it will set the stage for Congress to exercise a limitless direct taxing power to enforce whatever whim and fancy Congress may dream up, and it will be used to dwarf the suffering we have experienced for generations under the misapplication of Congress’ power to regulate commerce.
Regardless if Obamacare is actually repealed as proposed and promised by the Republican Party leadership, the Robert’s opinion regarding taxation opens the door to an unbridled direct taxing authority, and the ruling will constantly be pointed to in the future as a valid taxing authority of Congress. This taxing authority must not be allowed to stand!
Hopefully Pam Bondi and the 26 States will appeal the Roberts’ ruling and challenge it on the reasons regarding taxation which I summarized at the top of the thread. If it is not overturned then Representation with proportional financial obligation our founder’s check to deal with democracy, will have met its death and the larger populated states will use their greater representation in Congress to constantly plunder our national treasury. Always keep in mind when talking taxation and representation our Constitution’s fair share formulas:
_________ X House membership (435) = State`s No.of Reps
Pop. of U.S.
_________ X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE`S FAIR SHARE
And if there is any question as to why this rule of apportionment was adopted, keep in mind what Mr. PENDLETON stated during the ratification debates of our existing Constitution and with regard to the new rule of apportioning both direct taxes and representatives:
“The apportionment of representation and taxation by the same scale is just; it removes the objection, that, while Virginia paid one sixth part of the expenses of the Union, she had no more weight in public counsels than Delaware, which paid but a very small portion”3 Elliot’s 41 Also see Act laying a direct tax for $3 million in which the rule of apportionment is applied and each State’s Congressional Delegation returned home with a bill in hand for their State’s Governor and Legislature to deal with. And then see Section 7 of direct tax of 1813 allowing states to raise and pay their respective quotas in their own chosen way and be entitled to certain deductions in meeting their payment on time.
The only ones who win under Obama/Roberts’care are thieves and parasites ___ all others pay cash!
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.