• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758, 1205]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

makes me suspicious that he started with his result and worked backwards. Krauthammer has an interesting piece on this.

Roberts does have a dual role as interpreter of the Constitution and as Custodian of the institutional role of the Supreme Court. Roberts abdicated his role as Constitutional interpreter by his lawless opinion in order to save the legitimacy of the Court in the eyes of liberals and leftists.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

But if you bring them all under the umbrella of obamacare...and kill medicaid it would save us all money...

Im playing devils advocate...the right wants to make this out to be the end of the country as we know it...and the left wants to make it out to be the savior of the country and I beliee the truth is right smack in the middle...ITS NOW THE LAW OF THE LAND lets all try to work it out to make it the best it can be...crying whining threatening isnt going to change a thing
Dude, I was an insurance professional for quite some time. Obamacare is an economic timebomb, we need a bi-partisan dialogue in this country to refine healthcare but a bill full of nonsense, grandstanding, and a simple wish list isn't going to do it, there are some things we need to stop doing and a few things we should start doing, but until we get some things normalized the situation will devolve.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

I think the supporters of this decision missed a very important point I made. Let's say the religious right wins the next election and uses the decision for political gain, they say "okay, fine, you win on the abortion debate it's legal" "thanks to your new backdoor though we now can tax an abortion at 1000%, go ahead, take it to SCOTUS, but remember thanks to your new champion John Roberts we can tax for anything". Or, since the BOR was subjugated to tax powers, if say..........the poll tax were to be re-instituted, the civil rights act < BOR < Taxation. People don't realize what was done here.

Affirming Congress' power to tax doesn't mean that you can tax for anything and everything. If the purpose of a tax is to discourage people for exercising their constitutional rights, it is still unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has stated that abortion is a constitutional right, and the ban on the poll tax is literally written into the Constitution. On the other hand, you don't have any constitutional right to not have health insurance.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

I think the supporters of this decision missed a very important point I made. Let's say the religious right wins the next election and uses the decision for political gain, they say "okay, fine, you win on the abortion debate it's legal" "thanks to your new backdoor though we now can tax an abortion at 1000%, go ahead, take it to SCOTUS, but remember thanks to your new champion John Roberts we can tax for anything". Or, since the BOR was subjugated to tax powers, if say..........the poll tax were to be re-instituted, the civil rights act < BOR < Taxation. People don't realize what was done here.

Well here is what I understand from one of the 100 things about the bill I read yesterday. They ruled that Congress had the right to tax, but that when the tax goes into affect in 2014 another case can be raised about whether the tax itself is constitutional now that tax has been put into affect. So, that could be an agrument against your hypothetical situation (and a way to get it ruled unconstitional) and simply because Congress can tax, does not make the tax itself constitutional. Granted, I do not really understand much of it myself. I will try and look for the article.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Dude, I was an insurance professional for quite some time. Obamacare is an economic timebomb,

An economic timebomb for people in your line of work, perhaps. It's a major win for the American people and the American economy though.

we need a bi-partisan dialogue in this country to refine healthcare

I agree. Unfortunately we already tried that...the Republicans gave Obama the finger, abandoned their own ideas that Obama was willing to adopt, and tried to get the Supreme Court to overturn the policy they themselves had been pushing for 20 years. And now they don't have ANY alternative health care policy at all, because they completely abandoned their own policies, set fire to the earth behind them, then pissed on the ashes and salted the ground so nothing would ever grow their again. What on earth would make you think that if Obama had simply reached out a bit FARTHER to them, that there would have been any "bipartisan dialogue"? The Republicans would have simply abandoned THOSE ideas too, and that would then become the left plank in any future negotiations. Obama shouldn't have even started negotiating with himself in the first place.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

A fraud has been committed. Obama and the Democratic Congress contended that Obamacare's Mandate was not a tax during the process of enactment. Then Obama went to court and argued that the Mandate was just a tax. This is fraudulent. The fraud makes Obamacare illegitimate in the eyes of conservatives. The illegitimacy means that the furor over this decision will not fade away. Just as Roe v. Wade promoted division, alienation and estrangement so too will the Obamacare decision work like glass in a digestive system.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

What liberals want more than anything else at this point on the subject of Obamacare is peace and acquiesence. Isn't that true?

The meme on the right is that a fraud has been committed and resulted in an illegitimate act. That belief ensures that the furor will not die.

Since Obamacare will be in effect there will be an APPARENT direct line of causation between the increase in costs that would have occurred in any event and the decline of health care quality which results from rationing. And yes there will be clear healthcare rationing. Some groups like white seniors are clear losers.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

What liberals want more than anything else at this point on the subject of Obamacare is peace and acquiesence. Isn't that true?

Nope. I'm rather enjoying watching you flail around and have a temper tantrum. :lol:
 
they could have done that anyway. sin taxes have long been established.
Wait though, sin taxes fall under different catagories and exist because of an activity. With this decision the court basically says that you can be taxed without even a legal standing or compelling reason. Now all the government has to do is pass a "because we feel like it" tax, and if they have no other legal standing they can coerce you into compliance with the threat of tax bankruptcy. What happened here is not as simple as a sin tax.
 
But Obama didn't just raise taxes on the Middle-class. Such a claim is absurd.

I didn't make that claim. He did just raise taxes on everyone that can't or won't afford health insurance, middle-class or not.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Well here is what I understand from one of the 100 things about the bill I read yesterday. They ruled that Congress had the right to tax, but that when the tax goes into affect in 2014 another case can be raised about whether the tax itself is constitutional now that tax has been put into affect. So, that could be an agrument against your hypothetical situation (and a way to get it ruled unconstitional) and simply because Congress can tax, does not make the tax itself constitutional. Granted, I do not really understand much of it myself. I will try and look for the article.
That's the problem, the tax power was interpreted so openly that nothing else need be used. So something can be completely outside of the scope of government powers but taxable as an event, even punitavely so, I don't get where the power to tax can be extended to powers not granted and would love to know what the hell Roberts was smoking this week.
 
He doesn't see it that way. There are others who don't either. But the courts did. So, what makes this an issue for you and others? It doesn't change anything, other than tax will be repeated by republicans ad nausium.

The attorney arguing the case also did, which is why his tertiary argument was based on Congress' authority to tax.

My main issue is that I feel that the individual mandate is at the very least, an innapropriate overreach of govt. Another issue is the President, who is well versed on Constitutional law, claimed he would not pay for it through taxes and that is exaclty what he did. And he HAD to know that he was doing it.

Lastly, I'm simply amazed that it was upheld under Congress' right to tax, and nothing else, yet the partisans here still insist it is not a tax.
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

Dude, I was an insurance professional for quite some time.

What happens when you increase the size of a risk pool?
 
Wait though, sin taxes fall under different catagories and exist because of an activity. With this decision the court basically says that you can be taxed without even a legal standing or compelling reason. Now all the government has to do is pass a "because we feel like it" tax, and if they have no other legal standing they can coerce you into compliance with the threat of tax bankruptcy. What happened here is not as simple as a sin tax.

Government has always been able to raise, lower, create, and eliminate taxes because they feel like it. Your recourse for that is to elect someone else, not to try to claim the tax is illegitimate or unconstitutional.
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125]

What happens when you increase the size of a risk pool?
Dunno, how high is the added risk. If you add more unhealthy people than healthy the cost increases for those who previously qualified. What you are asking is basically asking "Why is the sky?".
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Nope. I'm rather enjoying watching you flail around and have a temper tantrum. :lol:

You are entitled to enjoy the moment. But all mirth is fleeting.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

What liberals want more than anything else at this point on the subject of Obamacare is peace and acquiesence. Isn't that true?

The meme on the right is that a fraud has been committed and resulted in an illegitimate act. That belief ensures that the furor will not die.

Since Obamacare will be in effect there will be an APPARENT direct line of causation between the increase in costs that would have occurred in any event and the decline of health care quality which results from rationing. And yes there will be clear healthcare rationing. Some groups like white seniors are clear losers.
Those that create and or promote false memes do not serve his fellow man, they are working against his best interests.
 
Government has always been able to raise, lower, create, and eliminate taxes because they feel like it. Your recourse for that is to elect someone else, not to try to claim the tax is illegitimate or unconstitutional.

Yes, but now they can tax you for not doing something... Now they can encourage us to do whatever they please, even beyond the bounds of the commerce clause or the necessary and proper clause (they explained that the individual mandate is not covered by either), so long as the only punishment for not doing what they ask us to do is a "tax". This is reach is much further than anything they've ever done. They've just said that the commerce clause & necessary & proper clause are completely irrelevant. That they can pass any law they want, so long as the punishment is only a tax.
 
I didn't make that claim. He did just raise taxes on everyone that can't or won't afford health insurance, middle-class or not.

so you just moved the goal posts.

first its "Obama broke his promise not to raise taxes on the middle-class".

now its "Obama broke his promise to not raise taxes on everyone that can't or won't afford health insurance, middle-class or not".

Obama has slightly raised the yearly taxes of folks who don't have and refuse to buy health insurance, whether they be billionaires or lower middle-class. Those taxes will go down as soon as they buy insurance or get a job that includes it.

suggesting that this can be considered a tax-increase on the middle-class, is intellectually absurd.
 
Yes, but now they can tax you for not doing something... Now they can encourage us to do whatever they please, even beyond the bounds of the commerce clause or the necessary and proper clause (they explained that the individual mandate is not covered by either), so long as the only punishment for not doing what they ask us to do is a "tax". This is reach is much further than anything they've ever done. They've just said that the commerce clause & necessary & proper clause are completely irrelevant. That they can pass any law they want, so long as the punishment is only a tax.

Okay, think about it this way. These bull**** programs were always sold under the Commerce Clause when everyone knew what they really are.....taxes. If nothing else, Roberts has removed the ability to do that and placed these programs out in the sunlight where they can be seen for what they are. No more commerce, no more bull****, no more slight of hand.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Roe v. Wade is still viewed by some as illegitimate after more than forty years. What will happen now on the right is the delegitimation of Obamacare in the minds of the conservative half of the country. Increased costs and decreased quality in health care will fuel the fires of delegitimization.

There are going to be glitches and problems that will invariably develop in Obamacare as it is implemented. It won't be possible to repair these problems legislatively. So President Obama will act outside the law and attempt repairs by executive order. This in turn does violence to the Constitutional Doctrine of checks and balances.
 
Yes, but now they can tax you for not doing something... Now they can encourage us to do whatever they please, even beyond the bounds of the commerce clause or the necessary and proper clause (they explained that the individual mandate is not covered by either), so long as the only punishment for not doing what they ask us to do is a "tax".

It's no different than giving you a tax credit for buying solar panels. They're two sides of the same coin...if you get a tax credit for solar panels, then it's essentially a tax on not buying them. And tax credits have been well-established for decades.

This is reach is much further than anything they've ever done. They've just said that the commerce clause & necessary & proper clause are completely irrelevant. That they can pass any law they want, so long as the punishment is only a tax.

No, they still can't pass laws violating the Constitution. So for example, they couldn't tax me for not buying a Bible.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Those that create and or promote false memes do not serve his fellow man, they are working against his best interests.

The determination of what is true and false is totally subjective. In any event what cannot be stopped is that tens of millions of people are in the process of losing faith in the United States Govt. That can't be prevented now. And it bodes ill for America. If you don't believe me about the process of delegitimization check out conservative media.
 
No, they still can't pass laws violating the Constitution. So for example, they couldn't tax me for not buying a Bible.


they can pass a law making you pay a heavy fine for not owning a gun though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom