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

To: Hunton Peck
which he found upheld individual liberty and curbed federal power even as it left the law in place.

I am more concerned about the ends than the means. If Congress can use the tax system to compel someone to buy something, isn't that a loss of liberty?

7 posted on 06/28/2012 2:12:32 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: kabar
Kabar, Roberts merely reiterated that for 225 years, Congress has had the ability to levy taxes; including non-activity as well as activity.

But there's a reason that during that entire time frame, Congress has never passed a law taxing inactivity - and why the 2010 Congress took great efforts in disguising its ploy.

Sure, in theory, Congress can tax you for not eating broccoli, not buying a Volt, etc. But, how does it actually gain the necessary votes to pass?

Think about the waivers & exceptions granted by the DHS that were crafted under the assumption of using the commerce clause for cover, which has -0- oversight and 100% discretion of the executive.

Now, the mandate is a poll tax. Exceptions, waivers, thresholds, etc have to be initiated in the House, passed & signed as law, and executed by the IRS.

If the executive were to have leeway on taxes, then any tax, whether it be income, property, etc, would all be subject to executive discretion.

Roberts dropped a bomb.

27 posted on 06/28/2012 3:55:33 PM PDT by semantic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

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