Posted on 06/28/2012 6:54:37 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
That's basically what Roberts' majority opinion was all about.
And another one can reinstitute it. It is the PRECEDENT that is important. That is what SCOTUS looks at in the future
okay just checking
You just confirmed my statement. It wasn't initiated in the House as a funding bill. It became such in the Senate. Critics have ever since recognized its tax implications, but the bill as passed is a Senate concoction.
While I agree that the Court should not have to spoon-feed Congress on their duties, to say that the mandate is constitutional as a tax, when it was inappropriately passed, is a disingenuous and harmful decision.
Now, yes. We have to go forward and use successfully the small gift we've been given. But it would have been far better had this been ruled unconstitutional in the first place. It could have been done, should have been done. But wasn't for the sole reason of protecting the court's "objectivity". Sorry, but that's an insignificant reason on such a momentous occasion.
You know that ol saying about catchin more flies with sugar. There is a district in Indianapolis similar to Rangles..(The one where they lost sixty ballot boxes and ended up with more than 100% of the registered voters participating)
Now the grandson is the representative. The state laws have craked down so a reoccurance of the above fiascal can’t be done....BUT the state/local officials are now working with the community to stop the crime, (mostly drug, thugs, and murder) Not saying it will ever vote R, but things at least from a distance seem to be turning around...and there is now a dialogue for further change....Miracles do happen....Keep praying.
It like the child that misbehaves for attention....Only give him attention when he does a behavior you desire and the “bad” behavior disappears.
Do we need to point out the illegal act of mislabeling it so it could be passed in the Senate....just another O-nipulation?
As we work to elect more conservative representation, where do we encourage those already elected to go? (I know, but seriously)
Ostensibly, I'd think this the easiest route to go. Eric Cantor has already started proceedings in the House for July, but it would have to pass both houses. I don't see that happening before November with the current Senate. But why rely just on that? A lawsuit in addition to ongoing congressional action, just to spur it on if nothing else, may be worthwhile. By whom? Someone on the right who's prepared, energized, to take such action. Horowitz? Judicial Watch? ?????
Do we need to point out the illegal act of mislabeling it so it could be passed in the Senate....just another O-nipulation?
Absolutely. Not only that, but the illegality of initiating a funding bill in the Senate. Every corrupt aspect of this legislation has to see the light of day.
As we work to elect more conservative representation, where do we encourage those already elected to go?
They're either with us or against the Constitution. The House won't be a problem. The Senate? Moreso a problem (even after November). But if we can make this a mandate come November, I'd hope anyone currently in office, who wants to remain in office come their next election, will heed the tea leaves.
You know...I have a problem with saying it was wrongfully labeled. It was not wrongfully labeled. The history of this shows/demonstrates in plain view a willful intent to commit ‘fraud’ against the American people.
They(Democrats) denied and denied this as a tax. They manipulated it into the commerce clause etc. Now, the court struck that part down and classified it as a tax. Essentially calling it what it is...bringing a truth to the fraud perpetuated on the American people.
Um, the ruling issued through the pirate Roberts has stamped the bill as now passed and challenged as CONSTITUTIONAL with the previso that the penalty is actually a tax and thus the whole damned monstrosity is constitutional. Sorry, to have to break that to you.
The SC has shown us where we must go; back to Congress. Congress must remedy their own errors. But we can, must, be the impetus. For it to happen (to insure Congress “hears” us), we have to create a mandate. Now, part of that impetus may well be judicial action such as lawsuits. But it has to happen in Congress.
Good question...but we need to stop looking around for someone else to go too.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
And oddly enough this is exactly what Roberts told us, isn't it? Wow. Bad law can be constitutional and Roberts told us it is not up to him or the court to 'fix' bad law. That Right belongs to We the People.
The more I read and chat about this ruling...we have a lot of work to do. I think we need to move forward right now and get people registered to vote.
How many FReepers are posters here, but don't vote? We assume they do, but do they? Now is the time for a Tea Party voter registration drive. Somebody was talking about a 'rally' and I said we don't need another rally. We need action.
Good question...but we need to stop looking around for someone else to go too.
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
And oddly enough this is exactly what Roberts told us, isn't it? Wow. Bad law can be constitutional and Roberts told us it is not up to him or the court to 'fix' bad law. That Right belongs to We the People.
The more I read and chat about this ruling...we have a lot of work to do. I think we need to move forward right now and get people registered to vote.
How many FReepers are posters here, but don't vote? We assume they do, but do they? Now is the time for a Tea Party voter registration drive. Somebody was talking about a 'rally' and I said we don't need another rally. We need action.
If the Constitution says taxes originate in the House and in fact the Senate produced the bill, can they just as a matter of “rules” throw the entire thing out... on a point of order?
The bill did originate in the House. This has been been hashed and rehashed ad infinitum. Spread the word so that people stop wasting valuable bandwidth with what should be common knowledge by now.
No, it did not. The bill that was in the House had major criminal penalties tied to the mandate. Serious fines and jail time.
This wasn’t a situation where the House sent the bill to the Senate. This was another one of those instances that the Senate Bill went to the House. Backwards. There was not a reconcilation process...everything was behind closed doors.
Freepers are involved. It’s their familly, friends, and neighbors that they need the tools to reach out and influence. If not those close to them, then who.
FR mail your way.
Not so fast...The Affordable Health Care for America Act (or HR 3962)[1] was a bill that was crafted by the United States House of Representatives in November 2009. At the encouragement of the Obama administration, the 111th Congress devoted much of its time to enacting reform of the United States' health care system. Known as the "House bill," it was the House of Representative's chief legislative proposal during the health reform debate, but the Affordable Health Care for America Act as originally drafted never became law.
On December 24, 2009, the Senate passed an alternative health care bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590).
Link: Affordable Health Care for America Act
Sorry, but the original House bill did NOT become law. The bill as passed was actually initiated in the Senate. I recall this from the debates here on FR at the time. It was part of our discussion.
SO the reason 0 and Co kept insisting that it wasn’t a tax, was because they knew they could not lawfully start a TAX bill in the Senate. Roberts just trumped their Ace!
That may be part of the reason, but the last thing Obama wanted, I’m sure, is to trumpet this bill, regardless of origin, as a tax. Now, it’s out in the open for all to see, and understand.
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.