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Regardless if Obamacare is actually repealed as proposed and promised by the Republican Party leadership, the Robert’s opinion regarding taxation opens the door to an unbridled direct taxing authority,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!