14 states already?

[Charles Stucker]

I hope this works, but in any case the groundwork is primed for state called constitutional amendment change convention. It would be good to see the states flexing their power.

If Obama gets the people of enough states irate enough to get a constitutional convention together then he may inadvertently HELP the united states. Go Go Obama mandates.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Also, the fine is constitutional because they're passing it off as a tax but the actual mandate to purchase something from a private entity . . . where is this in the constitution?

No, its a tax. You write the check to the United States Treasury, not a private entity.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

How is the mandate an income tax? How can they mandate that you buy something from a private entity? If you don't purchase insurance aren't they fining you? Or are they passing that off as a tax?

It appears they're reaching out and tapping EMPLOYERS with a fine of $700 PER uninsured employee.

My wife's employer pays 7500 a year for her insurance. 700 is a steal compared to actually proving HI.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I've looked into it and the main issue states are beginning to file suit over is whether or not they can pass laws exempting their citizens from the "mandate"

The "mandate" is actually an income tax. And no, a state cannot opt out of federal income taxes.

How is demanding an expenditure from a private citizen for a product purchased from a private comapny a tax on income?

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...9vicCg&usg=AFQjCNFFysMlccPNNzIN6s28SkTJrUZbwg

page 167

 

[SpidermanTuba]

The fine is being defined as a tax. They think if they pretend the fine is a tax they can skirt the Constitution. The Constitution allows the Government to tax. Of course what they FAIL to recall is that the Constitution requires that ALL taxes throughout the several States must be uniform.

A fine(tax) for just those that do not buy health Insurance is NOT uniform so is not legal nor Constitutional.

The requirement is that the tax be uniform THROUGHOUT THE STATES - not uniform throughout EVERYTHING. All this means is they can't tax you differently depending on what STATE you live in.

Seriously, are you this dumb?

 

[ihopehefails]

What people fail to realize is that thirty-seven states have some kind of nullification bill in the oven. When those pass it will shut down this bill completely because nullilfication works simply because the federal government can't do anything without the state's cooperation. It is what shut down the REAL ID act in 06

You need to stop the nullification garbage, oh braindead twit...

no state can nullify a federal law.

now run along and play, nutbar

Nullification has already worked for the REAL ID act and the constitution gives the federal government limited powers and what is not given is reserved for the states. You should look up the tenth amendment...stupid whore.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Enforcement of the REAL ID act requires state's cooperation. Enforcement of the 2.5% income tax on personal income does not. If local athorities refuse to assist in the arrest of individuals avoiding this tax, the federal government is more than equipped to do it personally.

 

[ihopehefails]

The law is constitutional. We all pay Medicare and Medicaid taxes. The super neo-corporatists should be thrilled that private industry is getting the windfall of the requirement to purchase health care: free market forces will dictate that competition will drive prices down. And if the American people really don't like it, then the government can collect it and buy insurance for you directly.

Either way, far right conloons, you are in the system legally and constitutionally: there is no out.

It is not because it states that congress has powers to do certain things and all other powers are reserved for the states. I know you throw out the supremacy clause but it states all laws in PURSUENCE of the constitution are the supreme law of the land. That is a limitation on the federal government that confides it to what it can pass in the constitution. I know most laws are of this nature but just because a law has been passed and can be enforced does not make it superior to any state law. It is only superior in that case when their are no opposing state laws to it so it becomes the state's choice if it wants to have that law applicable within its jurisdiction.

Medicaid and that stuff is enforceable simply because there is no opposing state law. When there is those, in theory, can be nullified. I doubt most state actually want to do this.

 

[ihopehefails]

The law is constitutional. We all pay Medicare and Medicaid taxes. The super neo-corporatists should be thrilled that private industry is getting the windfall of the requirement to purchase health care: free market forces will dictate that competition will drive prices down. And if the American people really don't like it, then the government can collect it and buy insurance for you directly.

Either way, far right conloons, you are in the system legally and constitutionally: there is no out.

We shall see. I do believe it is unconstitutional, but again, we shall see.

States could not overturn Civil Rights Laws or Roe vs Wade

They will lose here also

That is because most civil rights laws are based on the constitution and not on the will of the federal government. There is a big difference between the two.

 

[Charles Stucker]

That is because most civil rights laws are based on the constitution and not on the will of the federal government. There is a big difference between the two.

There is supposed to be a difference between the whims of the party in charge of the federal government and the constitution but liberal justices seem ready to allow anything which expands centralized control.

 

[ihopehefails]

Enforcement of the REAL ID act requires state's cooperation. Enforcement of the 2.5% income tax on personal income does not. If local athorities refuse to assist in the arrest of individuals avoiding this tax, the federal government is more than equipped to do it personally.

It becomes more difficult and sometimes people in authority respect other people's authority which is why nullification can work.

 

[Annie]

Without the mandate, the bill is a total failure. Stop the mandate and you kill the bill. Charles Kraughthammer, (not sure of the spelling), believes that Obama knows that there is not nearly enough financing for this bill and will soon be pushing for a value added tax, (VAT, national sales tax) to pay for this ugly monster.

If it can't be stopped through the courts, our only other option is repeal.

Maybe we should all just drop our Health insurance policy. It's cheaper to pay the fine/tax.

Well some of the money will come from college students. The government will borrow at 2. something % and lend at 6. something. Then will come the VAT taxes, added to what the states are already collecting in regressive sales taxes and increasing by the month. Sales tax in my municipality is currently 8.89% and rising in a few months, it's one of the lowest in 5 country Chicago metro area.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The law is constitutional. We all pay Medicare and Medicaid taxes. The super neo-corporatists should be thrilled that private industry is getting the windfall of the requirement to purchase health care: free market forces will dictate that competition will drive prices down. And if the American people really don't like it, then the government can collect it and buy insurance for you directly.

Either way, far right conloons, you are in the system legally and constitutionally: there is no out.

It is not because it states that congress has powers to do certain things and all other powers are reserved for the states. I know you throw out the supremacy clause but it states all laws in PURSUENCE of the constitution are the supreme law of the land. That is a limitation on the federal government that confides it to what it can pass in the constitution. I know most laws are of this nature but just because a law has been passed and can be enforced does not make it superior to any state law. It is only superior in that case when their are no opposing state laws to it so it becomes the state's choice if it wants to have that law applicable within its jurisdiction.

Medicaid and that stuff is enforceable simply because there is no opposing state law. When there is those, in theory, can be nullified. I doubt most state actually want to do this.

States cannot nullify federal law, period. They can file in court. If they attempt to interfere with the operation of federal law, the federal government can stop funds to the state.

 

[Ravi]

Were my tax dollars used to pay Haliburten? I think so.

It's really no different. If state can refuse to participate in one federal program they can refuse to participate in all and I just don't see that happening.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Without the mandate, the bill is a total failure. Stop the mandate and you kill the bill. Charles Kraughthammer, (not sure of the spelling), believes that Obama knows that there is not nearly enough financing for this bill and will soon be pushing for a value added tax, (VAT, national sales tax) to pay for this ugly monster.

If it can't be stopped through the courts, our only other option is repeal.

Maybe we should all just drop our Health insurance policy. It's cheaper to pay the fine/tax.

NO, that is exactly what government wants. You'd sell your liberty to save yourself some bucks?

All this bickering . . . . what I think many of the left fail to see is the bigger picture and that is the government taking over more and more control of our lives. Why are you so eager to give away your liberty? Why are you so eager to have government take responsibility for you? People who object to this bill aren't objecting to health insurance, aren't objecting to pre-existing conditions being covered or what ever . . . . we're object to the HUGE government power that now exists. That the left cant' or simply refuses to see this boggles my mind.

 

[Zoom-boing]

How is the mandate an income tax? How can they mandate that you buy something from a private entity? If you don't purchase insurance aren't they fining you? Or are they passing that off as a tax?

It appears they're reaching out and tapping EMPLOYERS with a fine of $700 PER uninsured employee.

The government can fine people? Where has this be done before?

What about the uninsured-by-choice citizen? If he chooses to not buy insurance but instead pays the fine then the government will buy his insurance? I'm confused.

How can the government fine someone for not purchasing something from a private entity? How can the government tax someone for not purchasing something from a private entity?

Someone --- show me where in the constitution is says that the federal government has the authority to mandate that someone purchase something from a private entity.

 

[goldcatt]

Without the mandate, the bill is a total failure. Stop the mandate and you kill the bill. Charles Kraughthammer, (not sure of the spelling), believes that Obama knows that there is not nearly enough financing for this bill and will soon be pushing for a value added tax, (VAT, national sales tax) to pay for this ugly monster.

If it can't be stopped through the courts, our only other option is repeal.

Maybe we should all just drop our Health insurance policy. It's cheaper to pay the fine/tax.

NO, that is exactly what government wants. You'd sell your liberty to save yourself some bucks?

All this bickering . . . . what I think many of the left fail to see is the bigger picture and that is the government taking over more and more control of our lives. Why are you so eager to give away your liberty? Why are you so eager to have government take responsibility for you? People who object to this bill aren't objecting to health insurance, aren't objecting to pre-existing conditions being covered or what ever . . . . we're object to the HUGE government power that now exists. That the left cant' or simply refuses to see this boggles my mind.

No, a lot of us on the left simply see no difference between slavery to the State and slavery to the oligarchs, theocrats and various assorted private entities just as hungry for power and control as government, and more likely in some ways to abuse it. At least the State has a certain level of accountability, limits and responsibilities, the others would have none if some had their way (some in general, not you specifically). Neither is to be completely trusted but balance is needed.

Unfortunately this law doesn't address either "side's" idea of freedom. It's too much government control for you, and handing over too much corporate control (and billions upon billions in unsustainable welfare) for me. Talk about setting up something too big to fail! I'm still reading up on that tax issue, it's an interesting question.

 

[Vanquish]

Ihopehefails, its fun to watch you cling to your last ditch hopes, but as a tax, this is constitutional and can't be nullified.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Enforcement of the REAL ID act requires state's cooperation. Enforcement of the 2.5% income tax on personal income does not. If local athorities refuse to assist in the arrest of individuals avoiding this tax, the federal government is more than equipped to do it personally.

It becomes more difficult and sometimes people in authority respect other people's authority which is why nullification can work.

Maybe I didn't explain this correctly.

The tax law is enforced by the IRS. IRS employees do not, have not, and will never give a shit what any state governor, AG, legislator, police chief, or otherwise has to say when it comes to doing their jobs. If the IRS is insufficient to do the enforcing, the US Marshall service and/or FBI agents will be called in - also people who could give two craps about what any state official has to say about anything.

The states have no mechanism by which to nullify an income tax - unless they want to secede, in which case the IRS, Marshall, and FBI will have to call in the United States Army and then it will be all over.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

The law is constitutional. We all pay Medicare and Medicaid taxes. The super neo-corporatists should be thrilled that private industry is getting the windfall of the requirement to purchase health care: free market forces will dictate that competition will drive prices down. And if the American people really don't like it, then the government can collect it and buy insurance for you directly.

Either way, far right conloons, you are in the system legally and constitutionally: there is no out.

It is not because it states that congress has powers to do certain things and all other powers are reserved for the states. I know you throw out the supremacy clause but it states all laws in PURSUENCE of the constitution are the supreme law of the land. That is a limitation on the federal government that confides it to what it can pass in the constitution. I know most laws are of this nature but just because a law has been passed and can be enforced does not make it superior to any state law. It is only superior in that case when their are no opposing state laws to it so it becomes the state's choice if it wants to have that law applicable within its jurisdiction.

Medicaid and that stuff is enforceable simply because there is no opposing state law. When there is those, in theory, can be nullified. I doubt most state actually want to do this.

States cannot nullify federal law, period. They can file in court. If they attempt to interfere with the operation of federal law, the federal government can stop funds to the state.

While true in principle, in practice the REAL ID law was at least partially nullified by the states.