Skip to comments.Whether Obamacare Is a Tax Depends on Venue Aide Says
Posted on 02/20/2012 10:55:01 AM PST by John Semmens
A key argument of the Obama Administrations legal defense of the Presidents signature health care legislation was called into question by acting White House budget director Jeff Zients testimony before the House Budget Committee. Zients was arguing that the penalty assessed by Obamacare on a person who fails to purchase insurance is NOT a tax.
On the other hand, Obamas lawyers have been arguing that the penalty IS a tax. This argument is necessitated in order for the Obamacare law to appear to be Constitutional. While Congress lacks the authority to require a person to purchase a productheath insurance being such an itemit does have the authority to impose a tax.
Zients attempted to finesse the issue by contending that offering contradictory arguments in different venues is okay. Look, from the legal perspective it is imperative that the penalty be classified as a tax, Zients told Representative Scott Garrett (R-NJ). So, thats what the lawyers say it is. But from a political perspective it is important that the President not be perceived as reneging on his promise not to raise taxes on those making under $250,000 a year. So, thats why Im telling you it is not a tax.
if you missed any of this week's other semi-news posts you can find them at...
I was for Obamacare taxes before I was against it.
Call what you want tax,fee,fine it’s one thing illegal,but what isn’t with Obama?.
Lots of truth in the satire. My mind always questions how they think it’s legal to tax a non-transaction where nothing of value is exchanged. If they can do that, they can decide to tax anyone for having a funny name.
Not satire because it’s true.
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.