Remember that? Obama telling us all that ObamaCare is NOT a tax. But according to the deciding vote in the Supreme Court decision today, it IS a tax and the act is upheld.
Chief Justice Roberts opinion is that the mandate violates the Commerce Clause but since he believes it is a tax, and that it was within Congresses power to tax, the violation of the Commerce Clause doesn’t matter.
Welcome to Canada folks, and the ever increasing tax rates.
If Congress can reach out and command even those furthest removed from an interstate market to participate in the market, then the Commerce Clause becomes a font of unlimited power, or in Hamilton’s words, “the hideous monster whose devouring jaws . . . spare neither sex nor age, nor high nor low, nor sacred nor profane.” The Federalist No. 33, p. 202 (C. Rossiter ed. 1961).
Barack Obama and the Democrats now own the LARGEST MIDDLE-CLASS TAX INCREASE IN HISTORY!
Don’t forget these words. They OWN it now.
Some liberal court watcher’s are urging caution:
The rejection of the Commerce Clause and Nec. and Proper Clause should be understood as a major blow to Congress’s authority to pass social welfare laws. Using the tax code — especially in the current political environment — to promote social welfare is going to be a very chancy proposition.In other words, Randy Barnett, David Rivkin, and the other lawyers who argued that the individual mandate was an unprecedented expansion of the Commerce Clause’s power were right. They may have lost the battle on Obamacare, but they now have some weaponry to win future battles on this issue. In a major case, the court has found the Commerce Clause indeed has some limits in a major case, and that really hasn’t happened since the New Deal court basically abandoned the traditional Constitutional reading of that clause in 1937.
Which would be good news on future cases, but not so good news now.
Either way, it moves on to Congress and repeal. The fight isn’t over by a long shot. Now taking the Senate and the White House is even more important than ever, if not than I really fear for this Republic.
Either way, ObamaCare will not work…ever:
This link has the CBO estimates for who is going to pay the taxes.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2902700/posts
This link has the taxes.
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/taxes-going-pay-pay-obamacare-145413745.html
The middle class is being hit with a tax increase no matter how this gets spun. Obama broke his promise of not raising taxes on the middle class plain and simple. Further proof he is not some godlike person who was going to rid us of all evil but rather a typical politician who is an opportunist and not to be believed.
Larry, it will be the largest tax hike, and at the worst possible economic moment in time. And yes, that’s also a “talking point”, which I’ll get to in a minute. But my response to you was not “too broad” or “too nebulous” because the subject of the tax hike IS the fiscal impact of the PPACA in total. The rosy numbers originally given, passed on with the other lies about it being a penalty within their Commerce Clause powers, has been surfacing with some pretty ugly stuff since all this transpired. And it’s going to get worse because they based their projections on an economic recovery that isn’t happening, and won’t be happening at the rate they wanted. Time for reality… no more Commerce Clause/penalty/paid for crap smoke and mirrors.
Therefore I didn’t dismiss your argument. What I pointed out is that you are passing along the talking points… and I don’t disagree that the Republicans also have their own, such as this… without thinking about what they are portraying. You can’t play the tax numbers game using just the mandate figures save on the perpetually stupid. Because the mandate wasn’t likely to be severable from the bill, upholding the mandate as a tax left in place the entire bill and all it’s fiscal repercussions. *That* is the Republican “talking point” of the largest tax hike on the middle class”.
I’m not going to buy this spin about it being just about the mandate tax, and I’m not going to let anyone I see, attempting to play the same bogus card, do it either. The nation has already just lived thru the largest pack of lies from a sitting POTUS and Congress, and we and our grandchildren are going to be paying dearly for trusting the elected ones in Congress and the Oval Office to have integrity. There’s a reason that O’healthcare is unpopular, Larry… and that’s because it’s a fiscal nightmare.
INRE phrases. I don’t use the “kool aid” phrase.. never will. A bit too fraternity sounding for my tastes. But I don’t place “talking points” in the same category. That is just a term to describe key phrases people use as shorthand to pass along the party message. My suggestion is you separate the two in your mind, otherwise you will go mad. You simply can’t wander in here and say the same things all the media is using, and pretend you aren’t using their shorthand or talking points. If I throw the “kool aid” phrase at you, feel free to call me out on it. But “talking points” isn’t a dirty word. And I’m sure you think it’s far preferable to me telling you that you are parroting the party line’s message…. i.e. using talking points.
Lastly, Medicare rolls… as in enrollment. I’ve provided the MA increase statistics to you about their explosive trend in increased Medicaid since RomneyCare’s passage. I’ve also provided you with the same site that let you compare even more populous states that don’t have RomneyTax/RomneyCare, and how their Medicaid growth is no where close. There is a reason that Congress put in Medicaid Expansion, and attempted blackmailing the States… because they know it will load down Medicaid, just like it did in Massachusetts.
And who pays for Medicaid, Larry? Where does that cash come from?
We can’t afford Medicare. We won’t be able to afford social security soon enough. And we darn sure can’t afford the mass enrollment in Medicaid coming our way. Especially with the employment/jobs prospects looking bleak for quite some time. What boomers aren’t on Medicare, the unemployed will be on Medicaid. Just where do you think the cash is supposed to come from, since it’s not going to rein in the cost of providing medical one iota?
INRE Romney, Larry. Quite a few of us, including you, already had that discussion in comments #80 thru #94, remember? Since he’s got no high moral ground here, of course he’d like the discussion to go away. Thus sucking the wind out of the sails was an act of self preservation and diversion.
Unfortunately, that got the dander up from the GOP hierarchy, who wants to push the fiscal impact of PPACA as a campaign point. Bad news for them is they’ve got the wrong guy running to play that game.
Does any of this surprise you? Not me. I think Romney’s squirming, trying to find the middle ground because he knows he’s vulnerable to the tax accusations and dumping people on the federal health rolls himself. And the GOP hierarchy is utterly clueless to the fact they’re setting up Romney with an emblazoned bullseye on his neat, buttoned down shirt. Despite that risk, the legislation needs to be addressed as an economic issue this season… even to Romney’s possible detriment.
The GOP running Romney, in this race, at this time, and a vote in the months following a SCOTUS opinion of the mandate, could go down as one of the dumbest things in history that they’ve done as a political party. Talk about wasted opportunities and bad choices… geez. They should have been recruiting and grooming a strong economic candidate, sans the health care baggage, from the end of 2009 on.
@MataHarley: Romney will have a lot more difficult time arguing against Obamawhatever, however this it what the election will be about:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/06/employers-add-just-80000-jobs-in-june-unemployment-rate-stays-at-82-percent/
Another poll released last week showed that healthcare was the top issue for just 6% of the population. Romney himself doesn’t have to make the case for the middle class tax increase and Obama’s broken promise, others will do it for him allowing him to focus on the dismal recovery which at best has stagnated.
As for Romney and alternatives, my first choice was Perry even though he is more socially conservative than I am because I believe he had the best resume to be President. The other potential candidates out there who decided not to run leads one to ask how effective they would have been given they didn’t step up to the plate because they felt Obama was a shoo in for reelection. I’d have reservations about voting for any of them in the future should Obama win because they failed to meet the challenge this time around when they were needed.