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

Skip to comments.

In Praise of John Roberts: Obamacare is indeed a tax, and an onerous one at that
Pajamas Media ^ | 12/11/2013 | by Michael Walsh

Posted on 12/11/2013 10:10:19 AM PST by SeekAndFind

Why is this man smirking?

OK, not really praise; Roberts’s failure to strangle the Obamacare baby in its crib when he had the chance will go down alongside the Dred Scott decision as one of the greatest moral disasters in the history of the republic. The man in charge of enforcing the Constitution blinked when confronted with a triumphalist party and a then-popular president, forgetting that he, Roberts, would likely be in Washington long after Obama was gone. In an attempt to save the Supreme Court’s reputation and standing, he destroyed it.

Still, even if inadvertently, Roberts got one thing right: the Patient Deflection and Unaffordable Care Act is a tax, and nothing but a tax. A punitive, regressive tax, to be sure — but a tax nonetheless. A tax on ideological stupidity, as its supporters are just now learning. Just wait til the “employer mandate” kicks in.

Remember that the PDUCA has nothing whatsoever to do with “health care.” That was just the heartstring-tugging pretense to mask a breathtaking power grab by the Democrats. No one’s health will be improved by the passage of this law, although many may well be adversely affected. Nor it is even really about “insurance.” For how can we call covering pre-existing conditions “insurance”? You can only insure against something in the future, not something that’s already occurred. Call it a socialized risk pool, or some such, but don’t call it “insurance.”

No, what Obamacare is — and was always meant to be — is an onerous tax on the middle class, wearing the usual Leftist disguise of “compassion.” With soaring deductibles and higher premiums for all, but “subsidies” for some, it’s a huge transfer of wealth from those who can least afford it, prostituting the insurance companies (through which the monies will flow) in the service of a governmental enterprise both unasked for and constitutionally uncalled for.

In effect, what Obamacare does is destroy the concept of insurance completely: if your deductible soars to $6,250 (the “bronze” plan) — meaning the amount you will have to pay out of your own pocket — then you might as well not have “insurance” at all, and simply pay a fee for service, at much lower rates. Meanwhile, your “premiums” become an entirely new, unplanned-for expense that will net you… nothing you didn’t already have before. Far better to simply buy catastrophic insurance and otherwise pay as you go.

What big teeth you have, Grandma

But that would defeat the whole point of Obama’s enterprise. As I wrote over at NRO’s The Corner in March 2012:

Does anyone — on either side — really think that the Patient Deflection and Unaffordable Care Act is about health care?

For if it’s about “health care,” aren’t there a myriad of ways in which the system could be improved without a “comprehensive” top-down solution? At a time of extreme economic dislocation, was there a nationwide clamor to make “health care” the top priority of the new administration?

Or is it really about the exercise of raw governmental power, to teach the citizenry an object lesson about the coming brave new world, one that surely will get even worse once Obama is safely past the shoals of his last election?

To believe in the “good intentions” of the former — as soft-headed conservatives are sometimes wont to do when crediting the hard Left with anything but sheer malevolence toward the country as founded — is to have to pretzel one’s mind around the internal contradictions of the bill itself (it’s a tax! It’s not a tax!) and the way in which it was imposed just a couple of years ago by a one-party Congress that no longer exists, having been rebuked and sent packing by an outraged electorate.

Far easier to believe in the latter — that Obamacare is just the canary in the coal mine of what’s coming next. That, once having established the hammer, the administration will use Obamacare (should the law be found constitutional) as the anvil upon which to smash the Republic once and for all. And the “progressives’s” Long March through the institutions will finally end in the all-powerful centralized government for which they’ve long yearned.

Sure, it’s fun to watch Obamacare implode — but it helps to remember that its very impracticality is a feature, not a bug. For the cure for “Reform” is always more “Reform,” not less. This isn’t the end. It’s only the beginning. Maybe the next time the Roberts Court has a chance to put this thing out of its misery, it’ll take it.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abolishobamacare; johnroberts; obamacare; obamacaretax; scotus; tax
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

1 posted on 12/11/2013 10:10:19 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Maybe the next time the Roberts Court has a chance to put this thing out of its misery, it’ll take it.”

If there is anything good about Roberts decision on
Obamacare, he stumbled dumb and blind walking backwards
into it. It wont be congress, the next president or
USSC that gets rid of Obamacare. If it happens at all it
will be the people and the states who do it. Forget about
congress too. They are in on it or compromised as well.


2 posted on 12/11/2013 10:19:35 AM PST by Slambat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

No praise for that traitor from me, he still voted with Kagan, the Wise Latina, and Ginsberg.


3 posted on 12/11/2013 10:20:17 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

God-damned idiots.

A tax is for the purpose of raising revenue. It’s not a tax, it’s a fine. A fine is for the purpose of punishing actions. Obamacare outlaws Christianity.


4 posted on 12/11/2013 10:22:22 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/roberts-switched-views-to-uphold-health-care-law/


5 posted on 12/11/2013 10:22:31 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

God-damned idiots.

A tax is for the purpose of raising revenue. It’s not a tax, it’s a fine. A fine is for the purpose of punishing actions. Obamacare outlaws Christianity.

The state has unrestricted power to tax; It does not have unrestricted power to outlaw.


6 posted on 12/11/2013 10:23:31 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.
The evil that men do lives after them;
the good is oft interred with their bones.

Shakespeare


7 posted on 12/11/2013 10:24:24 AM PST by HangnJudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Roberts is one of the most evil people on the planet.


8 posted on 12/11/2013 10:24:49 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Roberts is one of the most evil people on the planet.


9 posted on 12/11/2013 10:24:49 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

In the list of loathsome human beings, Roberts had drifted to near the top.


10 posted on 12/11/2013 10:25:03 AM PST by ZULU (Impeach that Bastard Barrack Hussein Obama the Doctor Mengele of Medical Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I don’t care what the law says or Robert’s decision. I’m not complying with Commiecare.


11 posted on 12/11/2013 10:26:31 AM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Governor Sarah Heath Palin for President of the United States in 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind


12 posted on 12/11/2013 10:26:32 AM PST by Iron Munro (Orwell: There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slambat


- the truth shall set you free:




- O B A M A C R A P -


the pansy scam



13 posted on 12/11/2013 10:26:53 AM PST by devolve (- "He's (Obama) just 'too talented' to do what 'ordinary people' do." - "All this for a damn fag!" -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dangus
God-damned idiots.

A tax is for the purpose of raising revenue. It’s not a tax, it’s a fine. A fine is for the purpose of punishing actions. Obamacare outlaws Christianity.

Yet somehow progressive taxation, which punishes higher income earners, is still considered a tax and constitutional.

14 posted on 12/11/2013 10:28:00 AM PST by freerepublicchat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dangus

If healthcare is a right (according to proponents), why are we now taxed for that right? I ask libs I know if they’re ok paying a free speech tax.


15 posted on 12/11/2013 10:30:54 AM PST by optiguy (Winter is coming.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dangus

It’s actually the fed gov placing an illegal ration/monopoly on a product and then forcing its subjects to purchase said product or suffer legal action by the fed gov.

But, here’s the rub. Since we aint up in arms yet, we aint ever gonna be.

If this straw didn’t break the camel’s back, that back can’t be broken.

We will complain. We will make all sorts of uselessly dire threats, but in the end, we will comply.

That is what we’ve become. We are no longer citizens. We are subjects.


16 posted on 12/11/2013 10:30:56 AM PST by Grimmy (equivocation is but the first step along the road to capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dangus
It’s not a tax, it’s a fine.

That is so obvious. A fine is a punishment for an action or an inaction. I park in a no parking zone. I am fined. I fail to signal before turning. I am fined.

I fail to buy Obamacare. I am fined.

17 posted on 12/11/2013 10:31:39 AM PST by Leaning Right (Why am I holding this lantern? I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Roberts was correct.

The bill uses the IRS to calculate a tax on income based on health insurance coverage.

Call it whatever you like. It's still a tax because it's accessed as a tax.

The real morons are the millions that stupidly passed the income tax amendment almost 100 years ago which gave the federal government limitless power to tax income and spend without apportionment.

18 posted on 12/11/2013 10:34:36 AM PST by freerepublicchat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slambat
" If it happens at all it will be the people and the states who do it."

Exactly those who Traitor Roberts claimed were responsible for the law's passage.

19 posted on 12/11/2013 10:36:28 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

ditto


20 posted on 12/11/2013 10:39:49 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The nice thing about it being a tax is that pre-empts the Dems moral argument that not signing uup for Obamacare is not complying with the law.

Not paying ‘the tax’ is not complying, but there is no penalty for that.


21 posted on 12/11/2013 10:41:20 AM PST by sickoflibs (Obama : 'If you like your Doctor you can keep him, PERIOD! Don't believe the GOPs warnings')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freerepublicchat

How has it survived this long when we should have “equal protection” under the law. It boggles my mind the mental gymnastics that had to be used to get around that.


22 posted on 12/11/2013 10:41:53 AM PST by Ghost of SVR4 (So many are so hopelessly dependent on the government that they will fight to protect it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Perhaps read the article….


23 posted on 12/11/2013 10:44:10 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
pre-empts the Dems moral argument that not signing uup for Obamacare is not complying with the law.

You think the Dems care about "moral arguments"?

24 posted on 12/11/2013 10:46:32 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: freerepublicchat

I agree. It would have been a radical reversal of precedent to say this tax was somehow unconstitutional, when we already have so many endless gimmicks in place with the tax code (buy energy-saving cars, get a tax credit, etc.). I would love for nobody to be able to get tax refunds for taxes they haven’t paid, but they do. If the courts were going to judge what is and isn’t a proper tax (or tax refund) it should’ve happened decades ago. There are plenty of stupid laws but it’s not the job of the courts to clean up the messes made by the legislature. The legislature is constitutionally permitted to write stupid laws.

I don’t however understand how the Medicaid expansion was thrown out but the rest of the law was allowed to stand, due to the lack of a severability clause.

Obamacare is still in the courts on several other issues, like the religious liberty issue, so the Supreme Court by no means declared it constitutional on the whole, only on the issues they heard so far. But because of the Medicaid decision, they seem to have precluded the idea that they’ll ever throw out the entire law on any basis, and instead only pick and choose what they like.


25 posted on 12/11/2013 10:46:47 AM PST by JediJones (The #1 Must-see Filibuster of the Year: TEXAS TED AND THE CONSERVATIVE CRUZ-ADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
It’s not a tax, it’s a fine. That is so obvious. A fine is a punishment for an action or an inaction. I park in a no parking zone. I am fined. I fail to signal before turning. I am fined.

I fail to buy Obamacare. I am fined.

And if you fail to go to college you pay more in taxes because you won't get tax credits that others. Is that a fine?

The government could reduce everyone's taxes by the amount of the education credits, then add a penalty back for not getting an education. Mathematically there's no difference between that and what we do now.

What about fining an entire state for not participating in the old 55 mph speed limit program? The federal government laid a tax on gas for the interstate system, then refused to give it back in road spending if states didn't impose the 55mph limit.

26 posted on 12/11/2013 10:47:44 AM PST by freerepublicchat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The infamy of what Roberts did to us all will live for centuries.


27 posted on 12/11/2013 10:48:39 AM PST by PATRIOT1876
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
RE :”pre-empts the Dems moral argument that not signing uup for Obamacare is not complying with the law.”
......
You think the Dems care about “moral arguments”?

Let me try again slooooly.

Dems moral argument to those others they want to comply.
Not a moral argument to Dems.

28 posted on 12/11/2013 10:48:40 AM PST by sickoflibs (Obama : 'If you like your Doctor you can keep him, PERIOD! Don't believe the GOPs warnings')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge

Shakespeare often has his characters say things that he does not necessarily believe himself. He was a Christian (I believe they’re still arguing over whether he was a Catholic), so he surely didn’t believe “Neither a borrower nor a lender be,” which directly contradicts Matthew. And it can be argued that Christianity posits the very opposite of this remark that the good dies and the evil lives on.


29 posted on 12/11/2013 10:50:26 AM PST by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ghost of SVR4; freerepublicchat

Probably because the income tax is segmented. Everyone pays the same tax on their first $50,000 or whatever. It’s only the higher bracket of income subject to the higher tax. So no one is charged a different tax on the same portion of income.

If they said all your income is taxed at a higher rate if the total exceeds a certain limit, then you’d have a better equal protection argument. That’s when you’re singling out an individual for different treatment, not singling out the income itself for a different tax.


30 posted on 12/11/2013 10:50:38 AM PST by JediJones (The #1 Must-see Filibuster of the Year: TEXAS TED AND THE CONSERVATIVE CRUZ-ADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: JediJones
Obamacare is still in the courts on several other issues, like the religious liberty issue, so the Supreme Court by no means declared it constitutional on the whole, only on the issues they heard so far.

My fear is that these taxes can trump the bill of rights.

Tax everyone with a gun. Tax everyone that says things the state doesn't like. Tax those with the "wrong" religion. Etc, etc.

There was a time when taxes paid for only government services used. With the income tax amendment, there are now no limits.

31 posted on 12/11/2013 10:52:41 AM PST by freerepublicchat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

A penalty is NOT a tax. Period.

Our Article V Convention ought to take teh opportunity to define the Federal taxing power.


32 posted on 12/11/2013 10:53:27 AM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PATRIOT1876
The infamy of what Roberts did to us all will live for centuries.

And I think Roberts knows this now, which is why I think he'll over turn it at any opportunity…..

33 posted on 12/11/2013 10:54:25 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I still want to know what they had on him. Must be somewhat serious or he wouldn’t have caved.


34 posted on 12/11/2013 10:55:10 AM PST by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed & water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
No praise for that traitor from me, he still voted with Kagan, the Wise Latina, and Ginsberg.

Spot on, the man is at best a coward, pulling back from a situation that could have given him a great spot in history as a good guy.

This article is full of it.

35 posted on 12/11/2013 10:56:01 AM PST by Lakeshark (Mr Reid, tear down this law!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Is this the largest Tax hike in history? And the most destructive?


36 posted on 12/11/2013 10:59:19 AM PST by MaxMax (Pay Attention and you'll be pissed off too! FIRE BOEHNER, NOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

Why do you think this? I see no evidence that the man won’t stay compromised, either by his own mental processes, or whatever else caused him to change his mind the last weeks before the decision. This was not the only decision he screwed the pooch on.


37 posted on 12/11/2013 10:59:30 AM PST by Lakeshark (Mr Reid, tear down this law!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Me thinks someone had photos of Mr. Roberts eating a wiener.


38 posted on 12/11/2013 10:59:38 AM PST by Slump Tester (What if I'm pregnant Teddy? Errr-ahh -Calm down Mary Jo, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
"A fine is a punishment for an action or an inaction"

you could characterize any tax that way. Income tax is a "fine" for earning a certain amount of money. Sales tax is a punishment for buying certain stuff. It's all a tax.

39 posted on 12/11/2013 11:04:51 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

People thought Justice Roberts was cleaver when he declared the noncompliance fines imposed by the ACA were instead a tax. Please correct me if I’m wrong but since any tax levied on the people, according to our constitution, can only come from the House, there was hope that the House would force compliance of that rule, thus killing the ACA. Obviously that was wishful thinking. The real reason Roberts declared the ACA fine as a Tax, other than that was what he told to do, is because an individual can challenge an imposed fine in court and a fine for not purchasing health insurance would, for all intents, have been found unconstitutional in a lower court. The legality of a Federal Tax once it becomes law can not be challenged. With that, Justice Roberts is as wretched and treasonous as the other anti-constitutionalist justices as well as the establishment cabal now running DC.


40 posted on 12/11/2013 11:06:37 AM PST by drypowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This is a fine albeit taxing argument.


41 posted on 12/11/2013 11:13:34 AM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark

Embarrassment……I think he’s ashamed…….


42 posted on 12/11/2013 11:14:53 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: PATRIOT1876

Is GWB still an admirer or Roberts, the way Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr., was of John Paul Stevens?


43 posted on 12/11/2013 11:16:39 AM PST by Theodore R. (The grand pooh-bahs are flirting with Christie, but it's Jebbie's turn!" to LOSE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: JimRed
This is just a blog, so it doesn't really give any reliable information.

Note the comment stating that Roberts hasn't broken any American laws, even if the adoptions thesis is valid. Only Irish laws. But of course it risks very bad publicity for Roberts.

This has been on FR, I know.

44 posted on 12/11/2013 11:16:41 AM PST by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: JediJones

I wasn’t aware about the same tax on the “first” amount of money. What a friggen scam.


45 posted on 12/11/2013 11:19:29 AM PST by Ghost of SVR4 (So many are so hopelessly dependent on the government that they will fight to protect it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

Frankly he should be, I hope you’re right. Anything substantial other than a guess?


46 posted on 12/11/2013 11:19:59 AM PST by Lakeshark (Mr Reid, tear down this law!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark

now come on…you know by now that my guesses ARE substantial!!!

(LOL - its a hunch)


47 posted on 12/11/2013 11:21:26 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
I had a hunch about that......

:-)

48 posted on 12/11/2013 11:22:58 AM PST by Lakeshark (Mr Reid, tear down this law!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Far better to simply buy catastrophic insurance and otherwise pay as you go.

That's the rub. Finding that catastrophic insurance is easier said than done--it doesn't meet the new minimum standards. Second, the cash market is not well-developed--even if you find the catastrophic insurance, you could wind up paying vastly inflated prices unless you have the energy to bargain.

Remember, the insurance companies have "negotiated" discounts from the walk-in rate. "Negotiated" is in quotes, because a more accurate description of the club pricing deal is that they have colluded, with the government's approval, to set rates against an inflated non-insured list price. To fight for the real, non-list price can be difficult when you are ill, and don't have time to search for a reasonable deal.

49 posted on 12/11/2013 11:24:36 AM PST by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark

BAZINGA!!


50 posted on 12/11/2013 11:24:44 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

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