Regardless of what the Supreme Court decided, I believe it to be Unconstitutional. The president has said that the fine imposed by the individual mandate is not a tax, but the Supreme court has decided that it is.
So tell me who is right? Either the president lied, or the Supreme Court is wrong.
In Writing: Under ObamaCare, up to $1,900 fee or jail, If You Don't Buy Health Insurance Is Obamacare unconstitutional?
CAPISCE
2012/11/15 14:51:43
|
|
|||||
|
127 votes
|
|
70% | ||
|
55 votes
|
|
30% | ||
USA Today:, Brown reported that Ensign got a clarification on what the result of "normal collection proceedings" might be, and got it in writing (HT Hot Air):
Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) received a handwritten note Thursday from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold confirming the penalty for failing to pay the up to $1,900 fee for not buying health insurance.
Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and could face up to a year in jail or a $25,000 penalty, Barthold wrote on JCT letterhead. He signed it "Sincerely, Thomas A. Barthold."
...
Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) received a handwritten note Thursday from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold confirming the penalty for failing to pay the up to $1,900 fee for not buying health insurance.
Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and could face up to a year in jail or a $25,000 penalty, Barthold wrote on JCT letterhead. He signed it "Sincerely, Thomas A. Barthold."
...
Americans who fail to pay the penalty for not buying insurance would face legal action from the Internal Revenue Service, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.
The remarks Thursday from the committee's chief of staff, Thomas Barthold, seems to further weaken President Barack Obama's contention last week that the individual mandate penalty, which could go as high as $1,900, is not a tax increase.
Under questioning from Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.), Barthold said the IRS would "take you to court and undertake normal collection proceedings."
Ensign pursued the line of questioning because he said a lot of Americans don't believe the Constitution allows the government to mandate the purchase of insurance.
Top Opinion
-
RandyScott 2012/11/15 15:28:35
"In July of 1798, Congress passed – and President John Adams signed - “An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen.” The law authorized the creation of a government-operated marine hospital service and mandated that all privately employed seamen be required to purchase health care insurance. [This program was later extended to lake and riverboat sailors, as well. ...]
Keep in mind that the 5th Congress did not really need to struggle over the intentions of the drafters of the Constitutions in creating this Act as many of its members WERE the drafters of the Constitution."
So much for claims that an individual mandate requiring the purchase of health insurance is unconstitutional.
(The relevant article is available online at:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/r... ) and commented upon at http://voices.washingtonpost....
It's like taking a loan out for a 2013 Benz, when you are behind in payments on your 2001 Kia
I'm sick of Obama. He's a nightmare, who got voted in by whatever means necessary. Now American's have to deal with the nightmare another 4 yrs. Our country & it's freedoms which so many patriots died to protect, are on Obama's chopping block.
Same thing, only now it's people! Really, really scary!
The delusional president see's himself as Black Judge Dredd.
"Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.
As some have said, "The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their President."
Second of all, you cannot be sent to jail for not having health insurance. That one was debunked years ago, along with death panels and 20,000 new IRS agents to scour the country looking for people without health insurance. It just isn't so.
Third of all, the law contains exemptions and waivers for a lot of people in the lower income brackets as well as small businesses below a certain size.
Fourth of all, among your many factual errors, you seem to overlook the fact that this article is over three years old and took place before the final version of the law was even being discussed. It was irrelevant then and it is more than irrelevant now, three years later. You should at least keep up with current events.
"Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.
As some have said, "The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their President."
And no, I don't think they got it right in Citizens United. That's why I and millions of other Americans ARE trying to get the Constitution amended so that corporations are no longer considered people and money is no longer considered speech. That's how a democracy works.
If you're also not happy about Citizens United, maybe you'd like to help us:
https://movetoamend.org/
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.
... Abraham Lincoln
"WE THE PEOPLE", are the rightful masters of both Congress and the
courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who
pervert the Constitution." Abraham Lincoln
I believe the mandate in it's current form is unconstitutional, had congress had the balls to try to add it as a "payroll" deduction, it would have been legal, but it also would not have passed.
rothchilds and what he said he could do about laws?