Did 26 State AGs play the America People when suing over Obamacare?

7-5-12 | johnwk

[JOHN W K]

I’m beginning to believe the 26 State Attorney Generals who challenged Obamacare may have acted more for political purposes or to pacify the people`s outrage over such an extraordinary assumption of power by the federal government, then actually having Obamacare overturned by the Court. When Obamacare was passed, instead of going directly to the Supreme Court which has original jurisdiction in such cases and which I then constantly pointed out, these AGs diddled and dallied for almost two years in lower courts which helped to diminish the people`s outrage by giving the people hope the law would eventually be rightfully struck down.

And now that Justice Roberts has upheld Obamacare as being within Congress` taxing power, but has failed to identify which specific kind of tax is used __ an impost, duty or excise __, the State Attorney Generals, including Pat Bondi, have not yet filed for a rehearing under the Court`s Rule No. 44, and asserted that neither an impost, duty or excise tax, as our founding fathers understood and applied these taxes, would allow the federal government to tax a citizen of Florida, or any State, for failure to have health insurance ___ a subject matter beyond the delegated powers of Congress, and one in fact retained by the States via the Tenth Amendment! And since the tax is not apportioned, it cannot be claimed to be a ``direct tax``, which in fact it appears to be! Unless there is a subject matter over which Congress has power to lay and collect taxes for, such as in Flint vs. Stone Tracy which taxed the privilege of a government granted corporate charter and measured of the amount of tax to be paid by the profits and gains realized under the corporate granted charter, the Obama mandate tax would in fact have to be direct and requiring an apportionment.

Additionally, although Justice Roberts rightfully concluded that the individual mandate cannot be sustained under Congress` power to regulate commerce, he failed to identify the enumerated power beneath Art. I, § 8, cl.1, for which Congress has power to lay and collect taxes, and then tax a citizen of Florida, or any State, for the sole reason of not having health insurance.

And so, the question is, why are the 26 State AGs not filing under Rule No.44, Rehearing and putting the Court on Judicial Notice with regard to Congress` defined and limited taxing powers?

The clock is ticking under rule No. 44 which allows a 25 day period in which to file.

JWK

“He has erected a multitude of new offices (including those formed under Obamacare) , and sent hither swarms of officers, to harass our people, and eat out their substance”___Declaration of Independence

[JOHN W K]

I have always been a fan of Walter Williams!

The irrefutable fact is, the Roberts' opinion is incomplete without him identifying the specific tax allowing the federal government to impose a penalty upon a citizen of Florida, or any state for that matter, for not having health insurance.

I see many Democrat voters are just fine with the federal government and Obama exercising an unlimited taxing power unrestrained by the limits of imposts, duties, excises and the requirement that direct taxes require an apportionment. How sad and unpatriotic.

Pam Bondi needs to file for a rehearing under Rule No.44, Rehearing and have Roberts identify the specific tax allowing the federal government and Obama to impose a penalty upon a citizen of Florida, or any state for that matter, for not having health insurance.

What upsets me is our media personalities and talk show hosts may not realize the importance of having Roberts identify the specific tax he alleges is connected with the Obamacare mandate. Has anyone heard any discussion by our Sunday talking heads concerning the specific kinds of taxes allowed to be laid by Congress and the limitations upon each? How about the 26 State AGs, have any of them questioned which tax Roberts is referring to?

There is a 25 day period to for Pam Bondi to file under Rule No. 44 and the clock is running out!

JWK

The big winners under the Obama/Roberts’ mandate are thieves and parasites ___ all others pay cash!

[JOHN W K]

I think another important question to be answered is, Should Justice Roberts be summoned before a Congressional oversight committee?

Aside from patriotic Americans rising up this coming election and taking control of both Houses of Congress and the Presidency, Justice Roberts ought to be promptly summoned before a Congressional oversight committee to have him identify the specific kind of tax ___ a duty, impost, excise or direct tax ___ he has asserted may be used in connection with the individual mandate, and also identify which enumerated power beneath Art. I, § 8, cl.1 authorizes Congress to penalize and tax a citizen of Florida, or any State in the Union, for the sole reason of not having health insurance. Without these questions being answered, how is Congress or a regulatory agency created by Congress, to enforce Obamacare legislation within the four walls of our Constitution?

And what about the people in each of the various states? What happens when the federal government enters a state and taxes a citizen for not having health insurance, or the kind of health insurance Obama and his pinkos pals have dictated, and the person refuses to pay? Are we to expect federal officers to seize the property of that person without knowing which provisions of the Constitution authorizes the tax or the requirement to have health insurance? How can a federal officer act in good conscious under these conditions when each has taken an oath to enforce the Constitution as their priority, and Justice Roberts has not identified the provisions of our Constitution which federal revenue officers will be asked to act under?

And what about the various State Governors who have been elected to protect the citizens of their State and have likewise taken an oath to support two constitutions as their priority? Are our State Governors to sit idle when federal agents come knocking on their citizen’s doors for payment of a tax which penalizes a citizen for not having health insurance concocted by the federal government which their State has not itself approved?

Is it not beyond question that the powers reserved by the several States extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State? Was the Tenth Amendment not specifically adopted to enforce the reserved powers of the States? Are our Governors and State Attorney Generals to close their eyes to the assumption of power which Justice Roberts has been delinquent in explaining?

The bottom line is, the Roberts’ opinion leads to uncertainty and various constitutional crises because he has not preformed his job in identifying the specific kind of tax which may be used in connection with the individual mandate, nor has Roberts identify which enumerated power beneath Art. I, § 8, cl.1 authorizes Congress to penalize and tax a citizen of Florida, or any State, for failure to have the kind of health insurance which Obama and his socialist crowd has cooked up. Are these not legitimate reasons for a Congressional oversight committee to summon Roberts before and have him identify the constitutional provisions which are in play under Obama’s individual mandate?

JWK

Obamacare by consent of the governed (Article 5) our amendment process --- tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court’s majority vote!