Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DOJ Defends Health Reform as Tax Obama Denied
Politico ^ | July17, 2010 | Josh Gerstein

Posted on 07/18/2010 9:48:40 AM PDT by gusopol3

The Justice Department is defending penalties in the new health care reform legislation for those who fail to buy or acquire insurance as taxes even though President Barack Obama has adamantly denied they're anything of the sort

(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: fraud; healthcare; obamacare; suit; tax
I don't understand why conservative media is so slow to take this up. Saturday night Freepers got it from GOP4lyf who picked it up from NYT 24 hours after it was published. Neither Mike Pence as the guest nor Brit Hume or Bill Kristol mentioned it on Chris Wallace's show.
1 posted on 07/18/2010 9:48:46 AM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: gop4lyf

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2554539/posts

previous thread


2 posted on 07/18/2010 9:50:44 AM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gusopol3

His lips move = liez, period.


3 posted on 07/18/2010 9:54:34 AM PDT by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gusopol3

When the government and employees are subject to the same healthcare as that of the peasants, someone might take it seriously.


4 posted on 07/18/2010 9:55:05 AM PDT by freeangel ( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like what you say))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gusopol3

It’s only a constitutional tax if it is applied uniformly right?

Also, how will it actually being a tax affect its cost?... if business pays it, will it be deductible for them?


5 posted on 07/18/2010 9:59:56 AM PDT by Principled (Get the capital back! NRST!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gusopol3

How do we simply “not comply” with this? Do we have to go off the grid entirely? It’s possible if we have to.


6 posted on 07/18/2010 10:04:23 AM PDT by Caipirabob ( Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cranked
Photobucket

7 posted on 07/18/2010 10:18:01 AM PDT by Dick Bachert (The upcoming election is the most important in our lifetimes!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
the Obama administration seems to have decided that mounting a robust defense against the lawsuit is more important than insulating the president from another round of political attack

interesting take, as Holder is throwing Obama under the bus; no, wait Obama was supposed to be throwing Holder under the bus on Gitmo; the bus is in for a bumpy ride.

8 posted on 07/18/2010 10:31:27 AM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Caipirabob

The Marxists began to pivot into this “tax” argument very shortly after it passed becasue they know that the argument that the Commerce Clause power to “regulate” commerce has never extended so far as to “compel” commerce by requiring the consumer to purchase a private product (health insurance) from private companies. If it is a tax that is uniform (proportionate,by the terms of Article I, Section 9) then it would be constitutional.

The Constitution places strict restrictions on Congress’ power to lay capitation (or direct) taxes under Article I, Sec. 9, which reads “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”

Exemptions for some people built into the Senate bill’s individual mandate tax would make it impossible for ObamaCare to meet this strict constitutional standard.

The Individual Mandate sanction (which is the very heart of ObamaCare) is an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder imposing a penalty on a class of citizens who do not engage in commercial transactions of the government’s choosing. So the tax argument, like the Commerce Clause argument, is doomed to failure.

For the first time in nearly a Century, the Third Branch, the Judiciary, is poised to save the Republic from this nightmare.


9 posted on 07/18/2010 10:33:18 AM PDT by Brices Crossroads
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Since High Chin, pelosi and reid originally claimed it was NOT a tax in order to get the bill passed, the court should hold them to that position.Wouldn’t it be nice if one day in America, when politicians lie to pass a bill, they have to be held accountable for their lies.

We can only hope.


10 posted on 07/18/2010 10:42:01 AM PDT by NumbersGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NumbersGeek

I believe the IRS is slated to collect.

If the IRS is involved , it’s a tax.


11 posted on 07/18/2010 10:59:12 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: gusopol3

REPEAL!!!!


12 posted on 07/18/2010 11:00:58 AM PDT by beethovenfan (If Islam is the solution, the "problem" must be freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

“If the IRS is involved , it’s a tax.”

If it a tax, it is unconstitutional. It is notbased on income so the Sixteenth Amendment does not permit it. adn it is not a capitation tax permissible under Art. 1, Section 9 since it is NOT UNIFORM AND APPLICABLE TO EVERY CITIZEN. It applies applies only to a subset of individual, that is: those who choose not to get health insurance. And even within that subset, theer are religious exemptions.

It is a penalty and it will stand or fall based upon whether the Courts conclude that it is within Art. 1, Section 8 power to regulate commerce. FYI, the Commerce Clause has never ever been extended to REQUIRE commerce. I don’t think any court would go this far.

Obama Care would have been constitutional (stil bad, but Constitutional) if they had included a public option and dropped the mandate. The Government could have made the public option so attractive and cheap that people would opt for it and the private insurers would be driven out of business. Once they were out of the business, the public option could be constricted and single payer would be the only option.

Trying to do it in the contest of private insurance is just a bridge too far, given the restrictions on Capitation taxes and the traditional limits on the commerce clause.

ObamaCare is unconstitutional. And it is not close.


13 posted on 07/18/2010 12:07:43 PM PDT by Brices Crossroads
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

14 posted on 07/18/2010 12:22:49 PM PDT by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Brices Crossroads
For the first time in nearly a Century, the Third Branch, the Judiciary, is poised to save the Republic from this nightmare.

Don't bet on it.

15 posted on 07/18/2010 1:14:06 PM PDT by dearolddad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson