by Tina Grazier
In a surprise 5-4 decision the Supreme Court has found Obamacare constitutional based on the mandated provision forcing citizens to purchase insurance or face a penalty. The court has determined that the mandate is a tax which Congress has the authority to impose. John Roberts joined the liberal justices in the decision. His vote was based on this narrow finding. The court also ruled that the federal government cannot force states to expand their medicaid programs. The ruling indicates that Congress cannot force citizens to make purchases under the commerce clause.
Republicans in the House will seek to remedy this explosive decision next month:
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor says in a statement: During the week of July 9th, the House will once again repeal ObamaCare, clearing the way for patient-centered reforms that lower costs and increase choice. We support an approach that offers simpler, more affordable and more accessible health care that allows people to keep the health care that they like. The Court’s decision brings into focus the choice the American people have about the direction of our country. The President and his party believe in massive government intrusions that increase costs and take decisions away from patients.
FOX Business News played a clip of an interview with President Obama wherein the President insisted the mandate was not a tax. He is scheduled to make remarks this morning as is Mitt Romney.
Stay tuned.
Goodness, but I am pleased. It is so very rarely that any entity of our government gets it right.
Nobody is telling me that I have to pay money to some “for-profit” entity, whose aim to generate dividends for investors, not provide healthcare … but I will pay the tax.
Opting to pay the tax is a tiny little step toward “single-payer”, and we’ll get there someday.
Yeehah.
Californians have been forced to buy auto insurance for decades. Of course, we don’t have to drive cars. We do have to have health, though. OTOH, f a person does not want health, I agree that they should not have to buy insurance for something they don’t want.
Someone who pays $6-10,000 a year for health insurance–that still won’t cover everything–might just get ecstatic over the prospect of having to pay only $2,000/year for their tax/insurance.
Libby, I am convinced you’re right, we are headed toward a single payer system. Ironic that it was George W. Bush that in effect saved the day for liberals and gave you Obamacare by his appointment of Roberts.
Yes, it is a tax. Some of us realized that all along, even though the President and the Democrats lied repeatedly by telling us it is not a tax. They did not want to be recognized as increasing taxes, in fact, the largest tax increase in the history of America. So, the Supreme Court got that right. It is a bad law, but the Congress does have the power to pass a law that raises taxes.
There is another lie in calling it the Health Care law, which everyone does, even people oppposed to it. In truth, it is not a health care program. It does not hire more doctors, more nurses, build more hospitals, or produce more medicine. It is merely a medical insurance law, specifically a law that requires the productive members of society to pay for the medical insurance of the deadbeats.
The supreme irony here is that when Obamacare critics came out and said the mandate was a tax the Liar-In-Chief and Democrats insisted it was not.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/09/obama-mandate-is-not-a-tax/
Now, when the Liar-In-Chief needs the tax angle to argue constitutionality, he comes clean and fesses up to the SCOTUS.
Roberts bought it but that argument was wholly unnecessary for the gang of four left-wing members of the court. They were already in the bag as evidenced by their crabbed reading of the Commerce Clause.
In any case, what more proof do you need that some politicians, in particular left-wing, progressive Democratic party politicians, will tax anything and everything and lie about it in the process?
A tax is not a tax is a tax – Gertrude Obama
We have to pass the bill so you can see what’s in it (a massive tax increase, suckers) – Pelosi
The federal government has unlimited power to tax. Let that sink in for a bit and then think about who you will vote for in November.
Well, there you go again! Blaming Bush!
I never bought Obama’s rationale that the mandate was not a tax. That was clearly him trying to throw every argument against the wall to see what would stick. Either he wasn’t confident that this would be found constitutional, or he thought hostility toward the mandate would grow if it was called a tax, or both…but whatever the case, I think it’s fair to say that he lied in this case. This doesn’t surprise me.
Soaps’ claim that this is “the largest tax increase in the history of America” is also a lie, though. Politifact rates it “Pants on Fire.”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/28/rush-limbaugh/health-care-law-not-largest-tax-increase-us-histor/
I think Roberts made the right call, and I’m glad to see him making a decision based on reason rather than partisan allegiance.
“f a person does not want health, I agree that they should not have to buy insurance for something they don’t want.”
Yes, well, that would work, if, when they become unhealthy, they refused to seek treatment. It does not seem to work out that way, and the rest of us should have to pick up the entire tab.
“Someone who pays $6-10,000 a year for health insurance–that still won’t cover everything–might just get ecstatic over the prospect of having to pay only $2,000/year for their tax/insurance.”
Ah, now, see … this is where the “stealth single-payer” comes in. Cause what’s gonna happen is the nation’s repulsively healthy youngsters are going to refuse to pay Kaiser $300 a month for “coverage” that does not cover anything at all until you’ve ponied up 7500 additional dollars out of your own pocket. They’re not gonna, and I don’t blame them.
Their gonna go with the tax, and as they age, the tax will increase. The Blues, being unable to compete will expire, and there you have it! … universal health care coverage!
“Yes, it is a tax. Some of us realized that all along, even though the President and the Democrats lied repeatedly by telling us it is not a tax.”
It’s a direct tax. You only pay it if you don’t have other coverage. Do you really think such people should get a free ride? Not pay their way?
I mean, you do know, don’t you, why it costs $300 to put your toe over the threshhold of an emergency room? You are forking over for those who don’t.
“It is merely a medical insurance law, …”
Damned straight. But you need to educate yourself about what it’s gonna do. If all goes according to plan (and does it ever?), this thing is going to totally revamp reimbursements for supplemental Medicare plans, put an end to scandalous excesses and save us taxpayers a packet.
“… specifically a law that requires the productive members of society to pay for the medical insurance of the deadbeats.”
One more time: only the uninsured pay the tax. You sound just like Governor Brewer … white is black, up is down, and a loss is a win. That’s very Hitlerian, you know.
Soaps: “… specifically a law that requires the productive members of society to pay for the medical insurance of the deadbeats.”
Soaps, are you really arguing that all people who cannot afford health insurance are “deadbeats?” That’s quite an ignorant and mean-spirited view, if you ask me.
Libby, while I agree with you about the potential benefits of the health care bill, I advise you to keep Godwin’s Law in mind when talking to your opponents.
But I couched it so poetically … Hitlerian.
I mean, come on, the only portion of the law not struck down was the portion not yet enacted. The justices say, in effect, “bring it on” … and she calls that a win.
A big lie, is a big lie. We don’t do anybody any good by pretending otherwise.
And Soaps is dead wrong about the mandate tax. Employed people who won’t buy private insurance, aka deadbeats, pay the tax … and everybody else chips in to varying degrees.
I does no good to let her deny it.
This might cheer you up . . .
Obamacare may now be invalid because the Supreme Court ruled that it relies on a tax for implementation.
According to the United States Constitution, all tax bills must originate in the House of Representatives. This law originated in the Senate, because at the time the Democrats were selling it as a purchase – not a tax. Since the Supreme Court has ruled that the law is indeed based on a tax increase, it would have had to be initiated as a bill in the House of Representatives.
Consequently, Obamacare is unconstitutional on a different criteria than the ones considered by the Supreme Court.