20 votes

Obamacare now invalid because tax bills must originate in House

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) may now be invalid because the Supreme Court ruled that it relies on a tax for implementation.

According to the United States Constitution, all tax bills must originate in the House of Representatives. This law originated in the Senate, because at the time the Democrats were selling it as a purchase - not a tax. Since the Supreme Court has ruled that the law is indeed based on a tax increase, it would have had to be initiated as a bill in the House of Representatives.

Consequently, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Law is unconstitutional on a different criteria than the ones considered by the Supreme Court in this latest landmark decision. By calling the individual mandate unconstitutional but allowing the law as a federal program to be funded by new taxes, Justice Roberts essentially nullified the law.

STILL ILLEGAL



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

This is incorrect.

Obamacare was introduced as a tax bill in the House.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:H.R.3590:

the version that was

the version that was eventually signed into law was the senate version.

Doesn't matter.

Article 1, Section 7, Clause 1:
"All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."

the senate did not take the

the senate did not take the house version and amend it. they took a fresh bill, the senate version of the bill and passed it.

Unfortunately, it is a fairly

Unfortunately, it is a fairly common practice.

i.e. The 2008 Bailout

So,

why are the GOP people not pursuing this line of thinking rather than repeal. Seems like this is a better option. And, hmmm, maybe the states will pursue this. I hope so.

The comments on the site are illuminating.

It is likely that the technicality may have got the bill through but it will give states' governors reasons to discredit the process. Nullify now.

http://www.examiner.com/article/obamacare-now-invalid-becaus...

Let's call this what it is

This is nothing short of extortion!

And we actually pay these so called servants to threaten and rob us!

" In Thee O Lord do I put my trust " ~ Psalm 31:1~

Fuggetaboutit. SCOTUS is not

Fuggetaboutit.

SCOTUS is not going to uphold the constitution. This ruling proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the majority of the current court is not going to very often overturn lawfully passed legislation for constitutional reasons.

Roberts said as much in the majority opinion. He said that in his opinion, the court's job is to find ways to make lawfully passed legislation constitutional. This is an astounding position, and portends many more horrid SCOTUS rulings ahead.

Judge Napolitano has it right. Roberts is going to be as bad for liberty as John Marshall.

Thank you dubya, you fool.

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein

we're waiting--

and watching--

to see what the penalty will be--

don't have insurance; can't afford it; haven't used governmental health programs even when available--

we're on the fringes of society--

we pay cash when we need health care, but we use alternative care--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Interested...

in hearing how it turns out for you. Until this year,I had not had health insurance since 1987. I have lived what sounds like a similar lifestyle; could not ever afford health insurance, but I am healthy and the few times I needed something and had to go to a doctor, I paid for it myself. I also use alternative health care.

I think I read the penalty was $695 or 2.5% of your income, whichever is higher (the $695 may not be exactly accurate, but it was over $600).

My situation now is that I turned 65 and became eligible for medicare. It really was a tough decision to make..I really can't afford it but if you don't take it right away a penalty builds up so that say, when you turn 80 or 90 and something does come up and your income is quite limited and your savings are mostly used up you can't afford to buy into it then. I don't like it, but I had to make a decision and with Obamacare coming down the pike, I thought I would be forced to buy something anyway. However, that $600 + penalty is less than what I am paying for medicare ($1200/year) and I took an advantage plan. I have never spend $1200 in any given year for my health care, so they are making money off of me.

Anyway, if you figure out a way to avoid having to pay something let me know!

we haven't gotten it figured out--

yet, but I appreciate your input--

the idea of being forced to turn to conventional medicine is outrageous--

the audacity of those who have implemented this plan is staggering--

We have research to do--

God bless--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Correct me if I'm wrong

But if it is a tax and not a "penalty", on those who don't carry insurance, then isn't it illegal since tax is suppose to be levied equally? Or are they going to raise the tax rate and give an insurance write off? How do they levy a "tax" on only certain individuals? How do you levy a "tax" on a non-purchase?

fireant's picture

Ask John Roberts.

He's the one who created a tax that isn't "direct" because it's really a penalty for non-participation. It's a special category of tax he created out of whole cloth.

Undo what Wilson did

It would be nice

if I could get a meeting with him. Hint hint, nudge nudge.

Someone Addressed The Issue In The Thread With Ben Swann's Story

Apparently Harry Reid saw this coming, and he gutted some other bill that originated in the House. They placed Obamacare into that empty shell and viola!: Technically, it originated in the House.

My question is the following: If the bill wasn't a tax in the minds of those who created it, why did they go to the trouble of making sure it originated in the House?

___________________________________________________________________________
"Bipartisan: both parties acting in concert to put both of their hands in your pocket."-Rothbard

Don't you just love how

Don't you just love how creative these criminals are?

If my need to be RIGHT is greater than my desire for TRUTH, then I will not recognize it when it arrives ~ Libertybelle

What a tangled web

we weave, when we practice to deceive.