|

Obamacare could still be unconstitutional because it’s a tax

The Pacific Legal Foundation argues that the Affordable Healthcare Act is unconstitutional because the bill originated in the Senate rather than the House of Representatives and taxes must originate in the House.

Under the Origination Clause of the Constitution, all bills raising revenue must begin in the House,” the Washington Times notes.

Excerpt:

You may recall in June 2012, when the Supreme Court ruled on “Obamacare” that Chief Justice John Roberts defined the bill as a tax, not a mandate. This, according to the Times, is where PFL attorneys saw their opening.

“The court there quite explicitly says, ‘This is not a law passed under the Commerce Clause; this is just a tax,’” foundation attorney Timothy Sandefur said recently. “Well, then the Origination Clause ought to apply. The courts should not be out there carving in new exceptions to the Origination Clause.”

There’s still hope that this costly healthcare bill will be declared unconstitutional despite the fact that the government is arguing against the lawsuit saying that a shell bill originated in the House and was stripped in the Senate and completely rewritten.

It’s not the only lawsuit against Obamacare, but it’s the only one that could potentially wipe out the entire bill! Freedom of religion lawsuits are still out there but would leave Obamacare mainly intact even if they are successful.

Our nation’s financial future will again hang by a technical thread. Let’s see if Chief Judge Roberts can get it right this time.

Share:

44 Comments

  1. gowader

    Don’t hold your breath Ted!!! We have the 2014 elections to think about, and so is Obama. If they win the house and control the senate, they can always re introduce the bill again. This time from the house. That’s highly unlikely of course. But having a president without a real birth certificate is even more unlikely.

    • Ted Biondo

      You are right gowader. However, if Obama wins control of the house and the senate, Obamacare will be the least of our worries.

  2. JRM_CommonSense

    That is true. The Republican Party will no longer exist because it will have proven it cannot run a campaign or retain any kind of power in the government. Yet it will still be ranting and railing against entities it could not defeat in a race for dog catcher.

  3. JRM,

    Keep dreaming. It will no longer exist except for the 30 governors held by the GOP along with 27 state legislatures they control. Other than that, they no longer exist.

    Once the personality of Obama is gone, the minority vote will shrink along with the youth vote. Do you think Shrillary Hillary is going to cause the masses to faint at the mere sight of her like Obama did with the kool-aid drinkers?

    The democrats will be doing good to keep the Senate in 2014. Those seven Senate seats held by dems that are up for re-election in states carried by Romney will be hard to defend although those candidates are doing their best to look like conservatives on gun-control and budget votes.

  4. I believe a lot of these knee-jerk, anti-gun , do nothing to punish the criminal democrats will be bounced, especially in the western states like Colorado. The coward, U.N. loving Obama knew this and that’s why all the silly laws are happening now , AFTER the 2012 election.

  5. mcgompers

    The only people taking this joke lawsuit seriously, with all due respect, are cranks. The bill originated in the House of Representatives as H.R. 3590. The Senate amended it and sent it back to the House. So the line about the bill “originating” in the Senate is patently false. The only argument this bogus lawsuit can make is that the Senate amended the bill “too much.” Well sorry, but I don’t see any language in the Constitution limiting how many words or paragraphs in a bill from the House the Senate is free to amend. It’s a nonsense argument that has absolutely no chance of going anywhere. If it did, it would have been included in the principle lawsuit against the law over two years ago, rather than in some painfully contrived, last-ditch desperate attempt to use the courts to do what opponents of this law couldn’t accomplish in Congress or at the ballot box.

  6. On a related note, new employment numbers were dismal (80,000, which doesn’t even keep pace with population growth), yet the unemployment rates actually dropped. More Obama smoke and mirrors?

    Speaking of anti-gun Leftist politicians, see who voted to give the UN control of our guns:

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/04/here-are-the-46-senators-who-voted-to-turn-your-gun-rights-over-to-un/?ModPagespeed=noscript

    Shouldn’t they be removed from office, for violating their oath to defend the Constitution?

    • Ted Biondo

      Snuss, it’s not smoke and mirrors, it simply that the mainstream media are reluctant, in most cases, to tell the American people that the unemployment rate dropped because of the following reasons:

      The headline read that the unemployment rate fell to 7.6 percent from 7.7 percent, but it was almost entirely for the wrong reasons. A whopping 496,000 people dropped out of the labor force, and 206,000 fewer people reported having a job, meaning that the proportion of Americans currently working actually ticked down, not up.

      The government only uses the statistics that place them in a favorable light. This was a terrible jobs report but lets see which networks use the information and which will not.

  7. Todd A

    Smoke and mirrors? Didn’t snuss just change the subject AGAIN?

    Ted, you should really try to use some integrity and put an end to that behavior in your blog.

    Getting back on track, the republican party is all but dead. You guys are being led around by your noses by ultra, right-wing extremists in the form of the tea party. If you really want to get back to viability you need to embrace some reasonable, conservative ideals like Reagan did.

  8. Todd A,

    See above. Once the personality of Obama is retired in 2016, please tell me who will lead this party? The GOP bench is deep with 30 governors and young leaders in the party. Who are the governors in you party? Who are the senators? DO you want Harry Reid to be the face of your party? How about Pelosi? Debbie Wasserman-Schultz? All three of ignorance on display.

    You loons should get your testicles on of the lockbox and quit being led around by a bunch of redistributionists. Grwo a pair and take care of yourself instead of looking for a gov’t handout.

  9. Todd A

    I see that you don’t read so well Terry and I will leave it at that.

  10. Read plenty well Todd. Once Obama leaves the stage, the dems are history, they have no bench. They will also have a failed legacy of eight years.

  11. Here’s another additional cost of Obamacare –

    “Tens of thousands of health care professionals, union workers and community activists hired as “navigators” to help Americans choose Obamacare options starting Oct. 1 could earn $20 an hour or more, according to new regulations issued Wednesday.”

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/obamacare-to-pay-navigators-20-to-48-an-hour-provide-free-translators/article/2526167

    Create federal policies that need more federal employees just to explain the law to the citizens.

  12. Speaking of the Obama regime and taxes:

    President Obama’s budget, to be released next week, will limit how much wealthy individuals – like Mitt Romney – can keep in IRAs and other retirement accounts.

    The proposal would save around $9 billion over a decade, a senior administration official said, while also bringing more fairness to the tax code.

    The senior administration official said that wealthy taxpayers can currently “accumulate many millions of dollars in these accounts, substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.”

    Under the plan, a taxpayer’s tax-preferred retirement account, like an IRA, could not finance more than $205,000 per year of retirement – or right around $3 million this year.

    Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/domestic-taxes/292071-obama-budget-to-target-wealthy-iras#ixzz2Pj9w0NSq
    Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

    The scary part of this is “substantially more than is NEEDED” – Who in the hell in the gov’t is going to tell me how much I need to for my retirement? Is some gov’t bureaucrat going to say what is a “reasonable level”?

    JRM – This ought to scare you with the millions you have socked away!

  13. JRM_CommonSense

    Terry, very little of my retirement is “socked away” in IRAs. But keep taking your cheap shots at me and your Abe Lincoln quote on another string will come home to roost and bite you in your assets.

  14. Hope you didn’t invest any of your millions in Stockton California (a liberal paradise) muni bonds

  15. JRM_CommonSense

    If you haven’t been able to figure it out yet, Terry, I wouldn’t have the millions if I had invested them in the only bond you seem aware of. You must have gotten burned on that one or you would not keep mentioning it. But keep trying to take those cheap shots at me. Abe is gonna use you as prime example number one.

  16. Never have invested in muni bonds.

    I’m not the guy that is big on California

  17. JRM_CommonSense

    Well then, you have missed an exceptional way to grow your money free of all federal taxes. There are many zero coupon municipal bonds on the market that are AAA rated and return between 5% and 7%.

    I am assuming that you are suggesting that I am the “guy big on California”. Well, once again, you have reached another absolutely wrong conclusion about something that I said in one of my posts. Abe is standing right behind you now!

  18. JRM,

    So you use municipal bonds as a tax dodge? I thought you want the 1% to pay their fair share or is that just other 1%ers?

  19. JRM_CommonSense

    Sorry tht you are mistaken again Terry.

    First, the money used to buy the municipal bonds is post-tax dollars. That means I paid income tax on those dollars when I earned them before I invested them in municipal bonds.

    Second, municipal bonds are tax free according to the tax code and the federal government so that investors will buy them so that municipal projects can be financed and completed.

    And third, I am not sure what made you think that I supported the “1% must pay their fair share” position. I guess it is backed by your mistaken assumption that I am a one of those “socialist liberal” because I don’t think the same way that you do. A common illogical assumption on this site. Or possibly it is based on your innate desire to make Abe Lincoln correct.

    Either way, that gives you three strikes in just one post. “Your Out!”

  20. JRM,

    Sorry you don’t understand finance or tax law.

    The fact that you used your post-tax dollars is irrelavant; otherwise interest on corporate bonds would be tax free also and any other investment income. It doesn’t work that way.

    Put the shovel down when you are in a hole.

  21. JRM_CommonSense

    So Terry, why are municipal bonds tax free?

  22. It’s more point two that you made, not point one. It’s an incentive to loan to municipal gov’ts. Also, unlike a corporate bond, a muni bonds interest was not deducted by the municipality on their federal tax return, since they don’t file one. A corporation deducts the interest expense it pays its bondholders, so its logical that interest revenue to the corporate bondholder would be taxable. It’s not that hard to answer a question.

  23. JRM_CommonSense

    And your point is. Jesus, you really are pedantic aren’t you. Done with this conversation, Your arrogance bores me.

  24. Chip Hilton,

    It’s not my arrogance that bothers you, its the fact I PROVED you wrong

  25. JRM_CommonSense

    You proved only that I was right. Municipal bonds are tax free. That is what I said, and that is what you said. All you proved is that you knew why. It doesn’t make you any less pedantic or pathetic. But keep calling names and pretending you are winning arguments. It is extremely funny! Can’t wait to see what you say next. I am sure it will further demonstrate pedantry and arrogance. Bye again.

  26. Chip Hilton,

    “First, the money used to buy the municipal bonds is post-tax dollars. That means I paid income tax on those dollars when I earned them before I invested them in municipal bonds.” – I proved you are wrong. That is a flat out false statement.

    I thought you were done with this conversation? Another falsehood.

  27. JRM_CommonSense

    So tell me how it is false, smart guy?

  28. Chip Hilton,

    Last night, you said you were done with this converstation, but yet bright and early this morning you started up again.

    Then you said bye again this morning, and yet you fibbed again and you are back.

    Put the shovel down Chip, you’re deep enough in the hole.

  29. JRM_CommonSense

    It is difficult to not respond when you are trying to pretend that you know something when it is obvious that you do not.

    Now, answer the question. Prove that my statement about purchasing municipal bonds with post tax dollars “is a flat out falsehood”. That sir is a lie on your part and you deserve to be shown as the liar you are. Or are you finally going to run and hide?

  30. Chip Hilton,

    I’m not proving that you purchased municipal bonds with post tax dollars. I have no idea how you invest/spend your money.

    What we were discussing is the reason why municipal bond interest. And you stated “First, the money used to buy the municipal bonds is post-tax dollars. That means I paid income tax on those dollars when I earned them before I invested them in municipal bonds.” Has absolutely nothing to do with the REASON why municipal bond interest is non-taxable. I explained that reasoning above.

    Nice try trying to change the subject – very slick, but again, put down the shovel your deep enough in the hole as it is.

    So how was Valley Falls High School Chip?

  31. JRM_CommonSense

    Terry, you have a very short memory. Here is an instant replay of the zero coupon municipal bond discussion.

    I said that I used post tax dollars to buy the zero coupon municipal bonds AFTER you asked me this question: “So you use municipal bonds as a tax dodge?”

    Your response to my “post-tax dollar” explantion why my buying zero coupon municipal bond was not a tax dodge was to first repeat my explanatiion: ““First, the money used to buy the municipal bonds is post-tax dollars. That means I paid income tax on those dollars when I earned them before I invested them in municipal bonds.” and then you said “I proved you are wrong. That is a flat out false statement.”

    You are the one who keeps trying to make us believe that you said something totally different than what you said. And yet, you are convicted by your own posts. I think that your uncontrolable pedantry has overwhelmed you to the point that ypu are starting to have brain sharts resulting in your inability to keep your posts and comments straight. Before you toss another shovel of stuff, you should go back and read what you have already written.

    Some day you will learn to answer simple questions rather than become pedantic. It will keep you out of the holes you continually dig. My guess is that you will once again pretend that you said something different than what you said and try to take us down another dead end path.

    Oh, and by the way, if you think that calling me Chip Hilton is an insult, you better go back and do your research on that series of books and the character.

  32. Chip Hilton,

    I think calling you Chip Hilton is stroking that massive ego of yours.

    The issue was the reason that muni bonds are tax free and you replied that you used post-tax dollars is irrelavant to the topic of muni bonds being tax-free.

    Maybe you aren’t Chip Hilton afterall, he played quarterback, I think you were more the defensive back type with the way you back pedal from your mistakes.

    So what Little House on the Praire school did you achieve four letters in?

    With all that digging, have you hit China yet?

  33. JRM_CommonSense

    Well, it is obvious that this congenital liar hasn’t got a clue about what he has written and what the discussion was about. He boldly lies about the issues being discussed. It is very clear from the posts that the answer about post-tax dollars was related to his question sarcastic question about me using zero coupon bonds as a tax dodge. Only an idiot would try to sell that the response was about why these bonds are tax free.

    All he is interested in is covering his assets by lying about what was being said. There is no arguing with a liar like this because he will only come up with different lies to cover the lies he has already delivered. Classic! He has finally proven that he will twist anything to make himself look good! No need even continuing. But we can look forward to one more shot from him so he can have the last word. Go for it liar, maybe there is one person out there who will believe you. But most are smart enough to recognize the classic meglamaniac personality in action.

  34. Chip,

    I proved Cunningham a bold face liar and have done likewise with you. Perhaps the two of you can share a bowl of Applesauce.

  35. Sweet, it just gets better and better. Well chip would describe him, he has a chip of common sense.

    Obamacare critics warned that President Barack Obama’s rosy $2 billion cost estimate for the government’s so-called “insurance exchanges” would likely rise. On Wednesday, they more than doubled.

    Health and Human Services Department (HHS) budget documents state that the federal government now expects to spend $4.4 billion this year on state grants to erect the government exchanges for the less than half of the U.S. states who are participating. In 2014, HHS says the cost will jump to $5.7 billion.

    In addition to the cost spike, the number of uninsured Americans who will now be covered under Obamacare has fallen once again:

    The result is that the number of Americans projected to gain insurance from the law has already eroded, by at least 5 million people, to 27 million by 2017, the CBO said in February. In addition, as many as 8 million people will lose health-care plans now offered through their employers, almost three times more than the CBO initially projected.

    HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius blames resistance from states for the cost increases and lowered coverage projections.
    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/04/11/Obamacare-Exchanges-Will-Cost-Double

    • Ted Biondo

      Yes, Wilson, the Obama regime, Sebelius in this case, always blame someone else for their bad solutions. It’s always someone else’s fault. What ever happened to the “buck stops here?” It’s probably so deflated with Bernanke’s QE rescue that it’s not worth enough for the Obama regime to care!

  36. JRM_CommonSense

    Instant replay:

    Terry says:
    April 6, 2013 at 8:42 pm

    Never have invested in muni bonds.

    JRM_CommonSense says:
    April 7, 2013 at 7:03 am

    Well then, you have missed an exceptional way to grow your money free of all federal taxes. There are many zero coupon municipal bonds on the market that are AAA rated and return between 5% and 7%.

    Terry says:
    April 7, 2013 at 11:18 am

    JRM,

    So you use municipal bonds as a tax dodge?

    JRM_CommonSense says:
    April 7, 2013 at 1:25 pm

    Sorry that you are mistaken again Terry.

    First, the money used to buy the municipal bonds is post-tax dollars. That means I paid income tax on those dollars when I earned them before I invested them in municipal bonds.

    Second, municipal bonds are tax free according to the tax code and the federal government so that investors will buy them so that municipal projects can be financed and completed.

  37. JRM_CommonSense

    Facts about zero coupon municipal bonds for those who think they know it all, but don’t.

    http://www.investinginbonds.com/learnmore.asp?catid=8&subcatid=54&id=171

  38. Adam Faber

    Please, Ted. That expression has only to do with buckhorn-handled knives and poker and has nothing to do with currency, no matter how desperate one is to gripe about our economy.

    Wikipedia teaches us: “The expression is said to have originated from poker, in which a marker or counter (e.g., a knife with a buckhorn handle during the American Frontier era) was used to indicate the person whose turn it was to deal. If the player did not wish to deal he could pass the responsibility by passing the ‘buck’, as the counter came to be called, to the next player….’The buck stops here’ is a phrase that was popularized by U.S. President Harry S. Truman, who kept a sign with that phrase on his desk in the Oval Office.”

    I found that with Google in fewer than ten seconds.

  39. Chip,

    JRM – Well then, you have missed an exceptional way to grow your money free of all federal taxes. There are many zero coupon municipal bonds on the market that are AAA rated and return between 5% and 7%.

    Terry – So you use municipal bonds as a tax dodge? I thought you want the 1% to pay their fair share or is that just other 1%ers?

    JRM – Sorry tht you are mistaken again Terry. First, the money used to buy the municipal bonds is post-tax dollars. That means I paid income tax on those dollars when I earned them before I invested them in municipal bonds.

    The fact that you use post tax dollars or pre-tax dollars is irrelavant. Falsehood # One.

    JRM – And your point is. Jesus, you really are pedantic aren’t you. Done with this conversation, Your arrogance bores me.

    Terry – Chip Hilton, It’s not my arrogance that bothers you, its the fact I PROVED you wrong

    JRM – Chip Hilton,

    “First, the money used to buy the municipal bonds is post-tax dollars. That means I paid income tax on those dollars when I earned them before I invested them in municipal bonds.” – I proved you are wrong. That is a flat out false statement.

    I thought you were done with this conversation? Another falsehood.

    Chip – you have been back to this conversation since Monday after you said were done. NOw that is an easy lie to prove. Go join Cunningham in Applesauce – you will feel right at home with another proven liar.

  40. JRM_CommonSense

    This dud is thicker than I thought. Don’t worry, I will not “bother” you again on this topic. If you think you have proved me a liar, then you are absolutely smoking something that is rotting your brain away. I will leave you to your delusions on this topic. However, I look forward to watching you make an a$$ out of yourself in many future posts. You just cannot help it. When you decide that you are going to hate someone, you spare none of your lie making skills. It is the one thing that you are exceptional at.

  41. You just made another lie.

    Go hang out with fellow liar Patti-Poo

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>