Posted on 07/02/2012 3:42:06 PM PDT by Libloather
House to prohibit IRS from implementing healthcare law
By Pete Kasperowicz - 07/02/12 01:25 PM ET
The House as early as next week will pass legislation prohibiting the IRS from receiving any money from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to implement the 2010 healthcare reform law.
Passage of the financial services spending bill is especially timely in light of last week's Supreme Court ruling that penalties the government can impose under the law against people who refuse to buy health insurance can be seen as a tax, because it is enforced like a tax.
That finding allowed the individual mandate to stand, and Republicans have already started reorienting their attacks against the law based on the knowledge that it only remains in place because it is an allowable tax.
The bill would have to get through the Senate and be signed by President Obama to become law.
The House will take up the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act sometime in July, and possibly next week when it returns from the July 4 recess. (The rule governing debate on the bill was already approved last week.) While the Obama administration requested another $1 billion so the IRS can implement the healthcare law, the bill, H.R. 6020, does not give any new money to the IRS.
Additionally, it "prohibits the IRS from receiving transfers from the Department of Health and Human Services to implement the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," according to report language accompanying the bill from the House Appropriations Committee.
The report notes that in 2010, HHS allocated $20 million to the IRS for enforcing the healthcare law "without the Committee's knowledge." It also notes that the IRS received $168 million from HHS to implement the law in 2011, and plans to get another $322 million from HHS in 2012.
"The Committee prohibits further such transfers during fiscal year 2013 in section 106 of this Act," the report states.
The bill would spend a total of $21.5 billion on the IRS, Treasury Department and other related agencies, about 1.7 percent less than the current funding level. The bill increases funding in some areas, such as Small Business Administration business and disaster loans, public safety and education in Washington D.C., and the Treasury Department's anti-terrorism financing programs.
To make up for these increases, the bill makes cuts in several areas, including the executive office of the president.
"The committee is disappointed that the administration's request did not propose additional reductions for the EOP salaries and expenses accounts," the bill report says. "The committee believes that the chief executive of any organization experiencing a fiscal crisis should share in the funding sacrifice along with the rest of the organization.
"Therefore, the committee has reduced the salaries and expenses appropriation for each organization under this heading," it adds.
Specifically, the bill would fund salaries in the executive office of the president at $650 million, down $9 million from the current level. White House salaries and expenses would be cut $2.8 million, and funding for costs related to keeping up the White House would be cut $671,000.
Other executive branch agencies would receive token cuts as well, while the Office of Management and Budget would see funding drop nearly $9 million, to $80.5 million.
The bill would also take a swing at the General Services Administration (GSA), which faced harsh criticism this year for a lavish, 2010 conference in which more than $800,000 was spent. Under the bill, the GSA would face more oversight related to its travel budget, and would be banned from holding conferences that don't comply with relevant laws and regulations.
The GSA would also have to submit quarterly spending reports to Congress, and face restrictions in monetary awards it gives to employees.
Good point!
If the Republicans will fight like girls as Sarah Palin has suggested, they will not be afraid to use everything in their political and legal arsenal. As for the candidate thing, Mary, it seems Mitt Romney got the numbers he needed in the primaries and he is it.
Unless you are absolutely, one-hundred percent confidently certain and sure that the GOP will retake the Senate and keep the House, there is no other way to fight The Illegitimate President except to vote for the opposing candidate. I personally don't recommend voting third party because it does not end well. I did it once and thus am partially responsible for the election of 43% B.J. Clinton.
This bill will go with the other 20 symbolic bills they passed repealing Obam-ney Care, put on the shelf. Watch them closely as they pass these symbolic bills and then slip through the REAL bills negotiated with Dems for more spending like the highway bill, Those are the ones that get signed into law,
They count on conservatives being easily distracted by symbolic gestures and it seems to work here with many.
How do you figure? Are you saying the "rich" don't buy things? Did they not ever work? Did their money just fall from the sky?
The "rich" don't only buy more they usually buy more expensive items such as luxury cars, boats, planes, houses, etc.
Sorry, that argument doesn't hold water with me. Besides, those that don't pay ANY income tax will finally get a dose of their own medicine. These people are as Nancy Pelosi said, "FREE RIDERS" I call them losers!
They way the "system" is set up now is, those that pay the most, get the least benefits. Those that pay the least or none at all, (which is half the nation now) get the most benefits.
Now, tell me how the hell is that fair?
This country needs to have a tax revolt that will bring this out of control government to it's knees. If the "rich" simply refused to file and refused to send in their checks every quarter, the federal government would have a sh!t fit.
How do you figure? Are you saying the "rich" don't buy things? Did they not ever work? Did their money just fall from the sky?
The "rich" don't only buy more they usually buy more expensive items such as luxury cars, boats, planes, houses, etc.
Sorry, that argument doesn't hold water with me. Besides, those that don't pay ANY income tax will finally get a dose of their own medicine. These people are as Nancy Pelosi said, "FREE RIDERS" I call them losers!
They way the "system" is set up now is, those that pay the most, get the least benefits. Those that pay the least or none at all, (which is half the nation now) get the most benefits.
Now, tell me how the hell is that fair?
This country needs to have a tax revolt that will bring this out of control government to it's knees. If the "rich" simply refused to file and refused to send in their checks every quarter, the federal government would have a sh!t fit.
I’m trying not to be cynical, but that seems to be the pattern.
In my opinion, we have exhausted those first three boxes years ago, time to move along.
If all spending bills have to originate in the House, then the Republicans can just exclude funding for the IRS enforcement, or for the law itself. Then there is nothing for the Senate to defeat, or for the President to sign.
I realize I am assuming that the Republicans have courage and want to listen to the people who elected them, and that the Senate and White House will lack the shamelessness to disregard the law and the Constitution, and that John Roberts will not cave in like a weak, craven man if they do.
But I’m just sayin’ - in a constitutional republic this is how it could work.
I’m not quite sure what kind of system we have at the moment.
It may provide cover as well since it will be veto proof. A few vulnerable Rat Senators could vote with the Repubs to get it passed only to have Bambi refusing to sign it. No way we would get 60 Senate votes to override a Bambi veto. It could of course hurt Bambi a bit with the electorate.
Oh my, that was uniformed and ill thought out!
Income taxes let the truly rich (that don’t work, or participate in our earned ‘economy’)get off completely untaxed!
The truly wealthy do not have income defined as taxable, they have wealth and - thank God - The US does not (directly) have a "wealth" tax.
That to the side, a flat tax is not just a tax on sales!
Where on Earth did you ever get that idea? The NYT perhaps?
It is also a flat tax on all income, and is inherently fair because everyone pays something, unlike the present mess where taxes are used to actually give back unearned income to the people who pay nothing.
Which means, of course, that they pay less than nothing.
Not to mention the wonderfully purifying effect of ending the stunningly bloated and expensive tax system, along with the IRS.
The amount of paperwork alone saved by this would repopulate an entire rain forest. :)
The name of the Bill should be, “Repeal the Obama-Roberts Healthcare Tax”. Any Congressman or Senator who votes against the Bill will have it hung around his or her neck in November. A clear choice on a clear question.
Are you kidding me? You must have read comments and thought the exact opposite of what I intended...
I realize how our Constitutional REPUBLIC is SUPPOSED to work, but I asked the question because there’s NO CHANCE IN HELL that anything stopping the ObamaTAX bill will be passed right now. And considering how much our government has been a dog and pony show theater...I seriously wondered why they were bothering, knowing the outcome already.
The leftist freaks I see are vilifying Republicans for being mad at doing their “patriotic duty” of paying taxes.
Stupid brainwashed leftist freaks.
Precisely correct. If the worthless Boehner was serious, he’d have attached something like this to the Highway Bill. But, as he is fundamentally un-serious and merely going through the motions of acting like he is opposing Il Douche’s agenda, we will get a series of worthless, symbolic votes.
It is a rank fantasy, but I truly wish that enough rock-ribbed conservatives are elected to the House and Senate to replace the worthless Boehner and McConnell in their “leadership” positions. Boehner can cry into his white flag of surrender and shuffle off to a back bench where he belongs.
If you recall this is how they used the Ryan plan twice. The Boehner House votes on a symbolic non- legislative ‘Ryan Plan’ that was not even a law(cheers) , then they pull out a already agreed to Obama-Reid-McConnell Boehner Debt limit deal and rush through a vote after putting a gun to House members heads to pass it.
Worse yet, now they are crying doomsday over the cuts to the military in that bi-partision debt bill that they passed that Boehner said he got 95% of what he wanted from..
Note the same thing in the Holder contempt vote (going no place) and the Highway pork spending bill passed immediately afterward,
I am watching these weazels closely.
There are 23 democrats up for reelection in the senate in Nov. Look what happened in 2012 with some of the dems that voted for Obamacare - they were fired. There will be pressure on the 23 dems to support this bill and support a repeal of Obamacare (vote 11 July in the House). True - some won’t care... like NY and Md... they’re beyond hope. But if we sit on our thumbs and rotate,and do NOTHING we will lose. If we fight, perhaps there’s a chance... slim as it is.
You ask, "why bother?"
If you understand "how our Constitutional REPUBLIC is SUPPOSED to work" then you understand that the House republicans "must bother."
Even though Obama is not going to sign anything that's good for the country right now, the Republicans MUST show up for work and keep plugging away.
Your comment suggests they ought to stay in bed and "not bother."
How about, "I saw the men standing on the walls of the Alamo and I got my hopes up....but then I saw Santa Anna's vast army and shake my head. They will have to overcome an overwhelming seige without reinforcements. I mean, why bother?"
What if I just declare it to be so? I have just as much right as Obamarama to make fiat law.
“I hereby declare that the IRS shall be prohibited from implementing any provisions of the ACA.”
Done!
Well, the sensible thing to do has two parts:
First, get everyone on record including Reid who will table the Bill. Even if Reid tables the Bill you go after Senators in the Majority's Party and wreck havoc upon them, which leads to the second part.
Second, strong campaign to belittle and ridicule all who want the IRS to go after the individual's inactivity. This is the part where the GOP screws up or purposely roll-over in the name of “reverence of the system” or “compromise” which has no place in politics at all. The only objective to warfare is to establish your will upon your adversary as quickly and forceful as possible.
Methinks you do a disservice to weasels...
Louis Gohmert told me that Boehner had personally told him that he would bring up a repeal of the Budget Control Act of ‘74 (which gave us Baseline Budgeting), once the debt bill was passed. Of course, it was merely a lie. Gohmert had no illusions about Boehner then, and most certainly not now.
I have often wondered why Boehner avoids contact with the more friendly elements of the new media, bloggers, FR, etc. It would be far more fruitful in getting out his message (supposing there is one beyond, “I surrender!”) and keeping the morale of what would be his strongest supporters up. instead, he plays to the same old MSM clowns, with predictable results. It occurs to me that Boehner regards us as a far less forgiving bunch than the MSM, as we demand not only truth, but results.
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.