• 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!

OMB director undercuts legal case for Obamacare

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Testifying before Congress this morning, President Obama's acting budget director Jeffrey Zients directly undercut one of the administration's key legal defenses of its national health care law as it nears a hearing before the Supreme Court.
In a hearing of the House Budget Committee Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., pressed Zients on whether the penalty that the health care law imposes on individuals who do not purchase health insurance constitutes a tax. Eventually, Zients said it did not.
But this directly contradicts one of the arguments the Obama administration is making before the Supreme Court in defense of the health care law, which is that the mandate is Constitutional because it's a tax and government has taxing power.


OMB director undercuts legal case for Obamacare | Campaign 2012 | Washington Examiner

Is it, isn't it? Does it matter? Do people even care?
 
Clearly, members of the Obama Administration don't want to call it a "tax" moreso for political reasons, but even characterising it as such is a misnomer because it truly isn't a tax but rather a tax penalty.

It is not a tax in the sense that monies will be collected consumate with your earnings, i.e., the payroll tax, the income tax, or as a result of you using or consuming something, i.e., an excise tax.

It IS, however, a tax penalty; a punitive action (or financial "punishment") for violating a segment of the tax code.

Our tax laws have carried such provisions for years, i.e., failure to pay (or even file) your federal income taxes usually subjects you to a tax penalty for tax evasion which is punitive in nature. The tax penalty under the individual mandate per ObamaCare would act in the same way (only without the jail time; per the law no one would be proceduted for not paying the tax; of course wage garnishment is always an option).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom