Skip to comments.Next: The Tie Tax
Posted on 07/02/2012 6:42:55 AM PDT by Kaslin
Once ubiquitous, the tie is now frequently being shunned. Whether youre a presidential candidate, a successful entrepreneur, a cable pundit or a young rebel bucking the Establishment, the open neck look is in style these days. For those who say it is a sign of societys downward spiral that so many are shunning appropriate business attire, the Supreme Court may have the answer: a tax.
By now, we are all well aware that the federal government cannot use the Commerce Clause or Necessary and Proper Clause of our beloved constitution to compel us to wear ties, but they apparently have the power to tax us if we do not!
Sure, it may be a bit cumbersome. Presumably, a panel of unelected bureaucrats would decide which careers require ties and those that do not. Women would likely be exempt, though that would raise 14th Amendment concerns. Speaking of the Constitution, lets look at one snippet from Chief Justice Roberts opinion:
Under that theory, the mandate is not a legal command to buy insurance. Rather, it makes going without insurance just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earn¬ing income. And if the mandate is in effect just a tax hike on certain taxpayers who do not have health insurance, it may be within Congresss constitutional power to tax.
Now, just replace certain taxpayers who do not have health insurance with certain taxpayers who do not wear ties. As National Public Radio would say, you now have the Supreme Courts Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.
Of course, the possibility of such an absurd tax moving through the system is unlikely; in fact, it is far more likely Congress will find a way to exercise fiscal restraint by cutting spending. Of course, given last weeks jet fume-induced boondoggle, fiscal responsibility is not regularly on display in Washington.
Two bills were particularly horrifying.
First, a massive omnibus-style bill that reauthorized highway and transit programs, extended subsidized student loan interest rates and reauthorized federal flood insurance. Although each deserved separate consideration, the bills were merged together and rushed through on a Friday afternoon, just hours after lawmakers received a Congressional Budget Office report on the cost of the package.
The House waived the rules to make is all happen, but why the rush? According to a senior Republican lawmaker the rush was because 99.9 percent of lawmakers want to go home Friday. Or maybe it was rushed because if the American people knew the bill contained an $18 billion bailout of the Highway Trust Fund, they would be up in arms.
Second, an appropriations bill for transportation, housing, and urban development inexplicably increased spending on some programs above last years level or above the Presidents request. Numerous amendments to reduce funding some by as little as $5 million were rejected by bipartisan majorities. For a nation approaching $16 trillion in debt, there is no excuse for such actions.
What is so unfortunate about these debt-inducing bipartisan votes is that they only serve to blur the distinctions where they exist between the two parties. Regardless of how the Supreme Court rationalized upholding Obamacare, the fact that it did uphold the law provided a moment of clarity for the American people and the political parties that claim to represent them.
Heritage Actions CEO Michael Needham put it perfectly, saying: Although the Court failed to provide a much-needed check on federal power, we have every bit of confidence the American people and their elected representatives will. Indeed, since the debate began in August 2009, Americans have vocally opposed President Obamas approach to health care, which remains unaffordable and irresponsible.
The news that presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney raised over $4 million in the decisions aftermath is a strong signal that Americans believe Obamacare can and must be corrected through the political and legislative process. Equally important, voters now have clarity as to who will fix the problem. And make no mistake, clarity is energizing.
America cannot afford a dispirited conservative movement that looks to Washington with a sense of hopelessness. The lack of clarity, not the lack of a tie, is the real sign of Americas downward spiral.
I like tie tacks.............
It’s a ‘jobs bill’
I have the Bulgarian version...
The House GOP needs to immediately start introducing bills, one after another, requiring people to buy/do ridiculous things or be taxed as a penalty.
Starting with a model 1911 .45 ACP pistol.
Pretty pricey! Where’s my voucher!
With this decision, the federal government can do anything, compel citizens to do anything, just by calling an action a tax.
Remember that our legal system works with legal precedents. A legal precedent has been set in this case.
I do not understand John Roberts legal reasoning. His opinion said that the mandate was unconstitutional under the commerce clause, but that didn’t matter because Congress has taxing authority. Thus, Congress has the right to do things that are unconstitional as long as it is done in the form of taxation. What am I missing? How does this make legal sense????
Don't give them any more ideas. They are already doing enough stupid things on their own.
Why do stupid when you can fundamentally change the USA? How about we:
Tax the voting dead?
Tax all voting illegal immigrants?
Tax any politician in receipt of foreign contributions?
Tax any politicians getting Soros funds?
And the list goes on!
Besides, the MSM will brainwash the people by election day to entirely forget about whatever they wish them to forget about. This election will be decided by how many laugh lines each candidate gets on Letterman, SNL, or Stewart.
Equally important, voters now have clarity as to who will fix the problem
Numerous amendments to reduce funding some by as little as $5 million were rejected by bipartisan majorities. For a nation approaching $16 trillion in debt, there is no excuse for such actions.
Arizona’s State Tie is the Bolo tie, for either sex, and I have lots of Bolo ties.
Poll taxes are racist!!!
So true! But SCOTUS has said if we tax it, it is OK! - New Idea:
Let's tax the Black Caongressional Caucus.
Hey, A-G, since inactivity can now be taxed, imagine the fortune that awaits Congress in taxing you for your dear departed who are no longer engaged in anything at all.
They could tax them for not joining with their deceased compatriots who are doing their fair share in the struggle to vote Democrats into office!
Death tax takes on an entirely new meaning. :>)