Constitutional issue: fines for not purchasing insurance?

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by Supposn, Mar 25, 2010.

  1. Supposn
    Offline

    Supposn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    863
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    51
    Ratings:
    +31
    I assumed that the U.S. Congress would find constitutional justification for mandating the purchase of health insurance. Now I read and hear they justify penalizing individuals, (as opposed to enterprises that fail to subsidize their employees insurance), as federal regulation of interstate commerce. That shouldn’t fly.

    [I digress to mention that all taxes on employers are in effect a sales tax for imbedded labor expenses passed on to customers and (unlike a sales tax) it also inhibits job creation and hiring, thus affecting the median wage].

    It could have been drafted and justified not as a penalty but as a tax credit only granted to those purchasing qualified medical insurance.
    My preference would be a federal subsidy of insurers for their per capita qualified primary medical insurance policies.

    I would have of course preferred that government’s net medical insurance expenses could have been partially funded by eliminating some of our tax inequities and enacting a federal sales tax. We all favor elimination of unnecessary government spending but we all have differing opinions as to what is and what is not necessary.

    Respectfully, Supposn
     
  2. CrimsonWhite
    Offline

    CrimsonWhite *****istrator Emeritus Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,978
    Thanks Received:
    1,755
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Location:
    Guntucky
    Ratings:
    +1,757
    They are using the 16th amendment as an excuse. Its a stretch though.
     
  3. Article 15
    Offline

    Article 15 Dr. House slayer

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    24,673
    Thanks Received:
    4,832
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Ratings:
    +4,859
    I think there is a fair chance SCOTUS shoots down the mandate.
     
  4. CrimsonWhite
    Offline

    CrimsonWhite *****istrator Emeritus Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,978
    Thanks Received:
    1,755
    Trophy Points:
    123
    Location:
    Guntucky
    Ratings:
    +1,757
    I would say that it is a Constitutional certainty.
     
  5. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,515
    Thanks Received:
    5,898
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,924
    Depends. I think the 4 conservatives will vote against it but that leaves one more needed to over turn it. I doubt the Liberals give a rats shit about the un constitutional nature of the bill. I KNOW our border Liberals do not care.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. woodjack
    Offline

    woodjack Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    149
    Thanks Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    46
    Location:
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Ratings:
    +28
    I think since they gave this to the IRS it is considered a tax. in which it would not be considered a fine, which is why i think this administration is so confident that this is constitutional. It was smart to set it up this way, that way it is not considered a penalty and which they may backdoor it through a technicality. slippery this administration is.
     
  7. Joe Steel
    Offline

    Joe Steel Class Warrior

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2009
    Messages:
    1,052
    Thanks Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    Ratings:
    +119
    Congress has imposed a tax on everyone without heatlh insurance.

    Congress has a clear and unambiguous power of taxation.

    Case closed.
     
  8. Oscar Wao
    Offline

    Oscar Wao Victory is Mine

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    2,139
    Thanks Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Quahog, RI
    Ratings:
    +301
    They had better.
     
  9. ☭proletarian☭
    Online

    ☭proletarian☭ Guest

    Ratings:
    +0

    Workaround:

    Everyone gets taxed. The state then buys/provides the insurance for you. You might or might not get to choose your company.

    The above is ultimately no different than any other instance of taxation- the money is taken and the State decides what to spend it on.


    Now, once the above is established, you are given a tax refund for your medical care purchase. Ultimately, the State's still providing the money to buy insurance- funds obtained through taxation. The end result is the same, save that you're left with greater liberty, as you can choose what company gets the contract (try choosing what planes the Air Force gets).

    Convoluted, yes. But ultimately all the same thing.
     
  10. Oscar Wao
    Offline

    Oscar Wao Victory is Mine

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    2,139
    Thanks Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Quahog, RI
    Ratings:
    +301
    And trying to compare health insurance to car insurance is absurd, to put it nicely and kindly.

    I'd be unkind, but not today.
     

Share This Page