Posted on 07/02/2012 7:12:19 AM PDT by raulgomez05
Prominent Dems including White House chief of staff Jack Lew and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi have repeatedly argued in recent days that the fee for not buying insurance under the health care law is in fact a penalty and not a tax.
They got support from an unexpected quarter on Monday: the Romney campaign.
Mitt Romney's senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom told Chuck Todd on MSNBC's Daily Rundown that he agrees - the fee is a penalty and not a tax, as the Supreme Court ruled last week.
"The governor disagreed with the ruling of the court," Fehrnstrom said. "He agreed with the dissent that was written by Justice [Antonin] Scalia, which very clearly stated that the mandate was not a tax."
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
bullsht, this Politico spinning for its master
The problem is, if it’s a tax for purposes of the courts it stands.
If it is not a tax for the purpose of legislative repeal, it stands.
It seems that the Alinsky-ites are going to ram this home and force it on us, no matter what.
We do not want it "replaced," Rodney.
We want government OUT of health care.
Tort reform, interstate sales of health insurance, and privatization will solve all the problems.
Government only knows how to create problems.
IMHO, the issue before us still stands: The need to get a last-choice RINO to be president, along with the most conservative House/Senate as possible to lead our top RINO. He’ll act and say stuck-on-stupid RINO things along the way, but he must defeat zer0, and then conservatives put aside boner and mcconnell, and lead Romeny and force the agenda.
LLS
Hi Noobie. I don’t read Politiho.
Romney agrees with the dissent. So do I. Obama and the Democrats have created a new monster—A PENALTY TAX. The federal government will now tax you for anything you do or don’t do.
If you quote Mitt Romney you don't have to spin.
It’s a Breath Mint! It’s a Candy Mint! It’s Two Mints in One!
And if it is not a tax, then it is unconstitutional. Roberts hung his hat on the taxing power to justify his decision--not the Commerce clause.
It really isn't a tax the way the Congress passed it and it is exempt from the anti-Injunction Act. Roberts engaged in sophistry.
This is spin by the author.
if Romney say it’s a tax thn he is agreeing with the Court liberals.
if Romney says its a penalty, he’s agreeing with Scalia, Thomas and most of us who believe its a coercive tool of tyranny.
He can still use the tax hike argument as long as he provides the caveat that its a tax per the Left of the Court.
Who cares what anyone calls it? Roberts said it was a tax, congress can do whatever the heck it wants to, and it is “constitutional”. All we have to do is elect the people on our side and hope they won’t screw us over. It’s in our hands right? /sarcasm
This is spin by the author.
if Romney say it’s a tax thn he is agreeing with the Court liberals.
if Romney says its a penalty, he’s agreeing with Scalia, Thomas and most of us who believe its a coercive tool of tyranny.
He can still use the tax hike argument as long as he provides the caveat that its a tax per the Left of the Court.
I don’t really consider that a boost for Obamugabe. We disagree with SCOTUS because it kept the mandate. Even if we disagree with their reasoning (which we do) the fact of the matter is the DeathCare law was upheld ONLY on the basis of Congressional power to tax.
So Politico can kiss Obamugabe’s backside all it likes—Romney’s plan all along was to kill it via reconciliation.
I don’t really consider that a boost for Obamugabe. We disagree with SCOTUS because it kept the mandate. Even if we disagree with their reasoning (which we do) the fact of the matter is the DeathCare law was upheld ONLY on the basis of Congressional power to tax.
So Politico can kiss Obamugabe’s backside all it likes—Romney’s plan all along was to kill it via reconciliation.
Romney’s senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom is quoted as saying it’s not a tax. Instead of guessing that Romney disagrees with his senior adviser, then show me where Romney contradicted him, or call for this senior adviser’s resignation for saying things with which Romney disagrees.
True. And voting won't do the job.
If we want to get the government out of our affairs, we have to stop putting our money into the government.
Unfortunately that would require more than most people are willing to do: retire early, deliberately lower income, or outright refuse to pay taxes and face the legal repercussions.
It will be defined by the day and need that the elites want. If they say it is a tax today, it still can be a fee tomorrow. The elites think you will believe any thing they will tell you no matter if is changes every hour.
Why is it Politico’s fault that Romney’s senior adviser said something and they quoted him?
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.