Skip to comments.The True Impact of the Obamacare Decision
Posted on 06/29/2012 6:37:14 AM PDT by Kaslin
Do Americans do you -- really understand the gravity of what happened in the Supreme Court yesterday? Do you have any idea at all how the power of the Imperial Federal Government of the United States has been exponentially increased?
Answer? No, you probably dont. You really cant be faulted for that, I guess. After all, our wonderful government school system was designed to educate you, but only to the point that you dont become a threat to your political rulers. The American people are a product of those schools, and the American people are, by and large, acting in the manner proscribed by those who educated them.
I spent the better part of yesterday listening to various pundits and reading blogs and columns about the ObamaCare decision. I think a lot of people are missing something here; missing something very important. The Courts ruling on ObamaCare grants the Congress of the United States the power to command virtually any action any action that would not in and of itself constitute a crime of any individual in this country, and to demand compliance with that command or be penalized. The federal government can now regulate virtually any human activity in which you wish to engage, and to regulate whether or not you will be allowed to refuse to participate in that activity, so long as a penalty is attached to your noncompliance.
Perhaps Im not making my point here; so let me try some scenarios:
Lets say that you are not a homeowner, but you are wealthy enough to purchase a home if you wished to. Arguably, under todays ruling the government could force you to purchase that new home. This the government could do in order to promote job creation in the construction industry, and it would be perfectly constitutional so long as a penalty is assessed for your non-compliance. The government would merely say that you are being taxed for your decision not to buy a new home, and our Supreme Court would uphold the law as a bona fide exercise of the governments taxing power.
The government wants you to change your profession move to another state buy more cotton clothing purchase an American-made car own no less than a dozen pair of American-made shoes limit your stock purchases to only unionized companies put solar panels on your roof perhaps even start watching MSNBC for a minimum of one hour every night. All of this the government might well be able to do so long as a penalty is levied for your failure to comply with the government directive. The penalty would, of course, be nothing more than a tax, and the regulatory requirement would merely be the government exercising its taxing power. Well the watching MSNBC requirement might violate the 8th Amendment. Theyll just have to work around that one.
Remember when some reporter asked Nancy Pelosi if the individual mandate was constitutional? Her reply? Are you serious? Are you serious? Now she can simply say Taxing authority, bub. Taxing authority.
This is a sad day indeed for our Constitution. The Supreme Court has ruled that Obamas insurance mandate is unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause. Its perfectly fine, though, since theres a fine for non-compliance. This column is short because the message is simple. Sit back now and try to imagine anything the federal government cannot require of you just so long as there is a penalty if you say no."
Scary! But, I hope this reality “scares” people to the polls this November to vote out Obama and the Democrats in the House and Senate.
US Constitution - Art 1/Sect 9:
No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
“No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”
It may be the Constitution, but it is certainly not an easy-to-understand sentence. Do we need a “translation” of the constitution, similiar to the various translations of the Bible, that states things more clearly to today’s Americans?
Direct tax? No, because not by proportion. Excise tax? No because the tax is on what you don’t buy, not on what you buy. Income tax? I don’t think so. Thus this must be a tax not authorized by the Constitution.
While Gallup said 69% of America opposes the health care act, over 50% of us live off government and will show up at the polls to vote for what they think is an absolutely free benefit.
What is the hardest thing for me to put straight is how Obama sold the idea that all the people who pay no taxes will pay a tax for not buying health care.
I am not an economist, but I don't see any way that this can work out financially.
On the subject of health care reform I see one little step that could make a difference. Back in the gas crisis of the Jimmuh Carter era it became mandatory for stations to clearly post their pump prices so that people didn't wait through a long line and then find out they were at a station that was charging exorbitant prices for gas. I'd bet that if doctors and medical facilities had to publish their prices it would naturally lead to competition and we'd see some of the things we pay for become more affordable as the drive for business forces doctors to be creative in their services and packaging.
Or be told to join a union, and if you don’t you’ll be taxed. Hmm, that sounds familiar for some reason...
It can be repealed in July by Congress. Perhaps there will be more than enough Democrat Senators willing to vote to save their careers.
DEATH PANELS FOR BABY BOOMERS ! ! ! ! !
Tell your extended family to save your life while they still can...
GUILLOTINE the dems at the ballot box!
Even if the Senate votes to repeal the law, Obama will veto it. The only way to rid ourselves of this atrocity is to rid ourselves of Obama.
This ruling could have consequences far beyond the obvious. Right now the state of Pennsylvania mandates me to buy car insurance to drive. Could this now be a tax, and if it is a tax does that not mean now I have a right to drive a car if I pay the tax? And if driving a car is now a right and not a privilege can I be pulled over at a DUI checkpoint. They can intrude on me now with DUI’s and Safety patrols because it is a privilege to drive not a right.
If you think this line of thinking could be a stretch just read the ruling from yesterday. I would expect this from the Ninth Circus of Appeals and not the Supremes.
Perhaps there are now 60 Senators to override a veto. Sixty Senators who realize now that a big mistake needs correction before this November’s elections. Maybe not; but it is possible, IMHO.
At present, you’d need 13 Democrats to cross over, and while there are certainly a handful who’d consider it, there are too many left-wingers in states where they have no effective opposition.
The Senate needs 67 votes (2/3 majority) to override a veto.
Thanks for this post. Some of us immediately realized the wide reaching impact of Justice Roberts ruling. But, I suspect, many Americans do not or will not acknowledge how this can....and will if Mr. Obama is reelected.....affect our entire life. Very sad and bad day for America.
I stand humbly corrected.