Implications of ObamaCare Ruling

Health careAs you have no doubt heard, the Supreme Court in a landmark 5-4 ruling declared that the individual mandate in ObamaCare was in fact constitutional – not under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution (the ability of Congress to regulate commerce (buying and selling) in the United States, but under the power of Congress to tax.  Effectively, ObamaCare is now considered a tax, and on that basis, it is Constitutional.

Except, the Obama Administration argued all along through the whole debate – endlessly and with precision – that it was not a tax.  It was NOT A TAX. Those arguing against ObamaCare could not do so on the basis that it was tax, because the proponents said that it wasn't. Those arguing against it said it was and on that basis, do we really want to raise taxes in America by TRILLIONS of dollars over the next decade? Do we wannt to penalize Americans who do not want to buy health insurance with a fine (i.e., TAX)? We ARE effectively forcing Americans to buy something by threatening to tax them if they do not. Land of the free?

George Stephanopolous interviewed President Obama Sept. 20, 2009 and argued with him about whether or not this is a tax. Obama flatly rejected the notion:

STEPHANOPOULOS:  But you reject that it’s a tax increase?

OBAMA:  I absolutely reject that notion.

Obama maintained that it was not a tax. But, it is found constitutional as a tax. I guess that Nacy Pelosi was right – we have to pass the law to know what's in it. Apparently, even Obama and the proponents of the law didn't even know what it was – they had no idea that it was actually a tax. The Supreme Court had to tell them it was. If you don't know what you are voting on and you argue for it/against it on completely separate grounds, how can the Supreme Court then step in and say, "Well, what you really meant was . . . ?"  We won't even talk about the bribes to states so their Senators would pass it as NOT A TAX.

This whole argument is illogical.  When I was a kid growing up, Louisiana had really strange drinking/alcohol laws. The law was that a place could sell alcohol to anyone over 18, but you had to be 21 to buy it. It was a conflicting law that created a loophole in favor of the drinking establishment and put the burden on the 18-21 year olds for breaking the law. ObamaCare has the same feel.  They can't make you buy it, but if you don't they can tax you. If you don't pay your tax, they can take all you have and ultimately imprision you.  It is twisted logic. 

Even worse than ObamaCare, what will happen next now that the Supreme Court has invented this new way of controlling the American people?  What else can Congress tax us on (with the threat of heavy fines and/or imprisonment if we don't pay those taxes)?  With as much corporate money as we have flowing through our government, what other products are we going to be forced to buy in the future under the threat of taxation if we don't?Can Congress decide that every vehicle must get 35 miles to the gallon and if you buy one that gets 30 miles per gallon they can tax you? Can they do this to our food purchases?  The neighborhoods we live in?  Do we now think that lawmakers can decide for us what to do and buy? The implications are mindboggling. I really am not trying to be alarmist, but when the Supreme Court finds a new power for the government in the Constition, the people never end up with more freedom – but always with less.

Chief Justice John Marshall of the U.S. Supreme Court in the decision on McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) said,

"The power to tax involves the power to destroy."

This Supreme Court just gave the Federal Government the power to tax if we do not buy the product that they had decided we should buy. If you don't pay that tax, you will be fined and/or imprisoned – because that is what happens to people who do not pay their taxes. 

Liberty died a little today, helped along by the results of greed and sloth as one group tries to make as much profit as they can and another group wants the government to pay for everything. Because healthcare prices are out of control (greed) and because there are many people who don't take care of themselves (sloth) and are not able to provide for themselves for other reasons (systemic injustice), we need Big Government come in and provide for us.  We will be provided for, like all children are, but we lost our freedom in taking the provision.

The power to tax involves the power to destroy.  Think about it.  

 

2 Responses to Implications of ObamaCare Ruling