Posted on 06/29/2012 12:42:23 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
Washington (CNN) — Republicans are seizing on the individual mandate’s penalty in the newly upheld health care law as proof President Obama broke his promise not to raise taxes on middle class Americans.
[.....]
As it turns out the tax penalty in the president’s health care law was modeled after the reform plan passed in Massachusetts under then governor Mitt Romney.
In a 2009 interview with CNN, Romney explained how the Massachusetts health care mandate worked. If the state’s residents decided to forgo health insurance when they could afford it, Romney said they would face the loss of a tax exemption. In other words, they would be assessed a tax.
“There are a number of ways to encourage people to get insurance and what we did, we said ‘you’re going to lose a tax exemption if you don’t have insurance,’” Romney told CNN in the interview.
During the interview Romney held up his health care law as a model that “could inform Washington on ways to improve health care for all Americans.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
“I’ll ask you the same question I asked someone else last night?
Should Roe v. Wade be overturned? It won’t end abortion, it will just put it back to the states to decide.
Is Obamacare equivalent to Roe v. Wade, in that it nationalizes health care? Should we leave it alone or overturn it, putting health care decisions back to the states to decide?
Some states, like Massachusetts, may go the route of social medicine, while others may not. Likewise, some states may ban abortion, while others may not.
The economies of scale are different within a state vs. within a nation. Decisions made within a state are different than when made within a nation.
-PJ”
You are supporting totalitarianism on the state level by looking to the 10th amendment, when even by the state constitutions and the spirit therein such a thing as that would be unthinkable. Paul A. Rahe demonstrates this quite well:
“Here is the first paragraph of the preamble to that Constitution:
The end of the institution, maintenance, and administration of government is to secure the existence of the body-politic, to protect it, and to furnish the individuals who compose it with the power of enjoying, in safety and tranquillity, their natural rights and the blessings of life; and whenever these great objects are not obtained the people have a right to alter the government, and to take measures necessary for their safety, prosperity, and happiness.
It needs to be read in conjunction with the first article of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights (which follows immediately upon the preamble):
All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.
There are two things worth noticing – the emphasis on “natural rights and the blessings of life” in the first paragraph of the preamble and the list of “certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights” in the first article of the Declaration of Rights – among which can be found the right “of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property.”
I would submit that these two passages dovetail neatly with the argument I made about the ends of government in my earlier post, quoted at length above; and I think that you can easily see that Romneycare – which presupposes that the government of Massachusetts can dictate to its citizens how they are to spend their own money – is in breach of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights. How, I would ask, can the property left to us after we have paid our taxes be in any respect our own if the state has the right to tell us how to spend it? And if the state can do this in one instance, what is there to prevent it from doing so in other instances?”
http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Is-Romneycare-Constitutional
Either way, all your arguments are made void when we acknowledge the simple fact that RomneyCare is perpetually bailed out by the federal government. Without the support of other states, RomneyCare wouldn’t exist, and this was done wholly without my consent down here in Texas, or yours in whatever state you are in.
Actually, I made similar arguments regarding the US Constitution Preamble and securing the Blessings of Liberty to our Posterity as a protection against aborting future generations.
Still, it appears that Romney is going to be the nominee. So what is the other choice, keep Obama?
-PJ
“Still, it appears that Romney is going to be the nominee. So what is the other choice, keep Obama?”
If the price of supporting Romney is embracing delusion and supporting his lies, the choice is clear:
None of the above
How many people did you convince to Vote for your Candidate during the Primaries and what was the result? Let me answer that for you (1) not enough and (2) Romney.
The Primaries are over. Don't support the Republican, you end up with the Democrat. Couldn't be any simpler.
How people here keep acting like there is a third choice boggles the mind. Primary Elections give us a multitude of choices, but they also whittle those choices down to the Party Nominee.
Don't support the Republican, you directly or indirectly support the Election of the Democrat. None of us can rise above that Reality, although many here profess to do exactly that.
Not Voting, Voting Third Party or Writing in another sure Loser of a Candidate will do nothing to stop Obama’s attack on America and our Freedoms. I don't see that as a valid strategy going into this Election.
If you think Romney and Obama are equals when it comes to destroying America, the divide here is even deeper than I imagined.
That being said, do what you think is best. I am fully aware that nothing I can say will change your position, but I feel it's our duty here to share our thoughts and concerns with the rest of the Board.
Have a good evening.
Thank you for stating the obvious.
They know it’s obvious and yet continue to beat the
‘Romney sucks’ drum - and we’re the delusional ones?!
The Alinsky bullcrap worked like a charm, divide and
conquer.
The Yahoo Boards are ripe with Libtards, but they were few and far between on both the places I visited. There were a bunch of former Obama lovers who have seen the light.
I will continue to pray that we will be successful in keeping the House, getting control of the Senate and winning the Presidency. If we do not accomplish all three goals, Obamacare is here to stay.
Romney was my second to last choice, but my Vote alone does not pick the Nominee. We are living in dangerous times and we must walk before we can run. I am a Conservative first and a Republican second, but reality is upon us.
Take care. You are setting yourself up for ridicule by agreeing with me on this topic. Just agree to disagree...
The only “people” that are going to “fix” this problem..are We the People....
We the People will have to tear this sucker out by the roots....personally.
You think I lack courage and I think you lack common sense when faced with a black and white issue. (no pun intended)
No matter our actions, Que Sera Sera.
The misguided priority some have is to destroy the GOP so it can be replaced with a "true" conservative party. Another 4 years of Obama won't do that but that is the delusion some "conservatives" have.
ABO Strategy - Romney is Elected and everyone here complains for the next four years that he isn't doing enough for us. The Supreme Court is saved from becoming a Rubber Stamp for the Obama Politburo.
I'll take my chances on Door #2.
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.